summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/lwg-closed.html
blob: c0848eb90e2eedeb6e0353345b2458fcc40fc317 (plain) 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914
2915
2916
2917
2918
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
2969
2970
2971
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022
3023
3024
3025
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
3077
3078
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
3130
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
3140
3141
3142
3143
3144
3145
3146
3147
3148
3149
3150
3151
3152
3153
3154
3155
3156
3157
3158
3159
3160
3161
3162
3163
3164
3165
3166
3167
3168
3169
3170
3171
3172
3173
3174
3175
3176
3177
3178
3179
3180
3181
3182
3183
3184
3185
3186
3187
3188
3189
3190
3191
3192
3193
3194
3195
3196
3197
3198
3199
3200
3201
3202
3203
3204
3205
3206
3207
3208
3209
3210
3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3217
3218
3219
3220
3221
3222
3223
3224
3225
3226
3227
3228
3229
3230
3231
3232
3233
3234
3235
3236
3237
3238
3239
3240
3241
3242
3243
3244
3245
3246
3247
3248
3249
3250
3251
3252
3253
3254
3255
3256
3257
3258
3259
3260
3261
3262
3263
3264
3265
3266
3267
3268
3269
3270
3271
3272
3273
3274
3275
3276
3277
3278
3279
3280
3281
3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
3287
3288
3289
3290
3291
3292
3293
3294
3295
3296
3297
3298
3299
3300
3301
3302
3303
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3310
3311
3312
3313
3314
3315
3316
3317
3318
3319
3320
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
3328
3329
3330
3331
3332
3333
3334
3335
3336
3337
3338
3339
3340
3341
3342
3343
3344
3345
3346
3347
3348
3349
3350
3351
3352
3353
3354
3355
3356
3357
3358
3359
3360
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3367
3368
3369
3370
3371
3372
3373
3374
3375
3376
3377
3378
3379
3380
3381
3382
3383
3384
3385
3386
3387
3388
3389
3390
3391
3392
3393
3394
3395
3396
3397
3398
3399
3400
3401
3402
3403
3404
3405
3406
3407
3408
3409
3410
3411
3412
3413
3414
3415
3416
3417
3418
3419
3420
3421
3422
3423
3424
3425
3426
3427
3428
3429
3430
3431
3432
3433
3434
3435
3436
3437
3438
3439
3440
3441
3442
3443
3444
3445
3446
3447
3448
3449
3450
3451
3452
3453
3454
3455
3456
3457
3458
3459
3460
3461
3462
3463
3464
3465
3466
3467
3468
3469
3470
3471
3472
3473
3474
3475
3476
3477
3478
3479
3480
3481
3482
3483
3484
3485
3486
3487
3488
3489
3490
3491
3492
3493
3494
3495
3496
3497
3498
3499
3500
3501
3502
3503
3504
3505
3506
3507
3508
3509
3510
3511
3512
3513
3514
3515
3516
3517
3518
3519
3520
3521
3522
3523
3524
3525
3526
3527
3528
3529
3530
3531
3532
3533
3534
3535
3536
3537
3538
3539
3540
3541
3542
3543
3544
3545
3546
3547
3548
3549
3550
3551
3552
3553
3554
3555
3556
3557
3558
3559
3560
3561
3562
3563
3564
3565
3566
3567
3568
3569
3570
3571
3572
3573
3574
3575
3576
3577
3578
3579
3580
3581
3582
3583
3584
3585
3586
3587
3588
3589
3590
3591
3592
3593
3594
3595
3596
3597
3598
3599
3600
3601
3602
3603
3604
3605
3606
3607
3608
3609
3610
3611
3612
3613
3614
3615
3616
3617
3618
3619
3620
3621
3622
3623
3624
3625
3626
3627
3628
3629
3630
3631
3632
3633
3634
3635
3636
3637
3638
3639
3640
3641
3642
3643
3644
3645
3646
3647
3648
3649
3650
3651
3652
3653
3654
3655
3656
3657
3658
3659
3660
3661
3662
3663
3664
3665
3666
3667
3668
3669
3670
3671
3672
3673
3674
3675
3676
3677
3678
3679
3680
3681
3682
3683
3684
3685
3686
3687
3688
3689
3690
3691
3692
3693
3694
3695
3696
3697
3698
3699
3700
3701
3702
3703
3704
3705
3706
3707
3708
3709
3710
3711
3712
3713
3714
3715
3716
3717
3718
3719
3720
3721
3722
3723
3724
3725
3726
3727
3728
3729
3730
3731
3732
3733
3734
3735
3736
3737
3738
3739
3740
3741
3742
3743
3744
3745
3746
3747
3748
3749
3750
3751
3752
3753
3754
3755
3756
3757
3758
3759
3760
3761
3762
3763
3764
3765
3766
3767
3768
3769
3770
3771
3772
3773
3774
3775
3776
3777
3778
3779
3780
3781
3782
3783
3784
3785
3786
3787
3788
3789
3790
3791
3792
3793
3794
3795
3796
3797
3798
3799
3800
3801
3802
3803
3804
3805
3806
3807
3808
3809
3810
3811
3812
3813
3814
3815
3816
3817
3818
3819
3820
3821
3822
3823
3824
3825
3826
3827
3828
3829
3830
3831
3832
3833
3834
3835
3836
3837
3838
3839
3840
3841
3842
3843
3844
3845
3846
3847
3848
3849
3850
3851
3852
3853
3854
3855
3856
3857
3858
3859
3860
3861
3862
3863
3864
3865
3866
3867
3868
3869
3870
3871
3872
3873
3874
3875
3876
3877
3878
3879
3880
3881
3882
3883
3884
3885
3886
3887
3888
3889
3890
3891
3892
3893
3894
3895
3896
3897
3898
3899
3900
3901
3902
3903
3904
3905
3906
3907
3908
3909
3910
3911
3912
3913
3914
3915
3916
3917
3918
3919
3920
3921
3922
3923
3924
3925
3926
3927
3928
3929
3930
3931
3932
3933
3934
3935
3936
3937
3938
3939
3940
3941
3942
3943
3944
3945
3946
3947
3948
3949
3950
3951
3952
3953
3954
3955
3956
3957
3958
3959
3960
3961
3962
3963
3964
3965
3966
3967
3968
3969
3970
3971
3972
3973
3974
3975
3976
3977
3978
3979
3980
3981
3982
3983
3984
3985
3986
3987
3988
3989
3990
3991
3992
3993
3994
3995
3996
3997
3998
3999
4000
4001
4002
4003
4004
4005
4006
4007
4008
4009
4010
4011
4012
4013
4014
4015
4016
4017
4018
4019
4020
4021
4022
4023
4024
4025
4026
4027
4028
4029
4030
4031
4032
4033
4034
4035
4036
4037
4038
4039
4040
4041
4042
4043
4044
4045
4046
4047
4048
4049
4050
4051
4052
4053
4054
4055
4056
4057
4058
4059
4060
4061
4062
4063
4064
4065
4066
4067
4068
4069
4070
4071
4072
4073
4074
4075
4076
4077
4078
4079
4080
4081
4082
4083
4084
4085
4086
4087
4088
4089
4090
4091
4092
4093
4094
4095
4096
4097
4098
4099
4100
4101
4102
4103
4104
4105
4106
4107
4108
4109
4110
4111
4112
4113
4114
4115
4116
4117
4118
4119
4120
4121
4122
4123
4124
4125
4126
4127
4128
4129
4130
4131
4132
4133
4134
4135
4136
4137
4138
4139
4140
4141
4142
4143
4144
4145
4146
4147
4148
4149
4150
4151
4152
4153
4154
4155
4156
4157
4158
4159
4160
4161
4162
4163
4164
4165
4166
4167
4168
4169
4170
4171
4172
4173
4174
4175
4176
4177
4178
4179
4180
4181
4182
4183
4184
4185
4186
4187
4188
4189
4190
4191
4192
4193
4194
4195
4196
4197
4198
4199
4200
4201
4202
4203
4204
4205
4206
4207
4208
4209
4210
4211
4212
4213
4214
4215
4216
4217
4218
4219
4220
4221
4222
4223
4224
4225
4226
4227
4228
4229
4230
4231
4232
4233
4234
4235
4236
4237
4238
4239
4240
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
4249
4250
4251
4252
4253
4254
4255
4256
4257
4258
4259
4260
4261
4262
4263
4264
4265
4266
4267
4268
4269
4270
4271
4272
4273
4274
4275
4276
4277
4278
4279
4280
4281
4282
4283
4284
4285
4286
4287
4288
4289
4290
4291
4292
4293
4294
4295
4296
4297
4298
4299
4300
4301
4302
4303
4304
4305
4306
4307
4308
4309
4310
4311
4312
4313
4314
4315
4316
4317
4318
4319
4320
4321
4322
4323
4324
4325
4326
4327
4328
4329
4330
4331
4332
4333
4334
4335
4336
4337
4338
4339
4340
4341
4342
4343
4344
4345
4346
4347
4348
4349
4350
4351
4352
4353
4354
4355
4356
4357
4358
4359
4360
4361
4362
4363
4364
4365
4366
4367
4368
4369
4370
4371
4372
4373
4374
4375
4376
4377
4378
4379
4380
4381
4382
4383
4384
4385
4386
4387
4388
4389
4390
4391
4392
4393
4394
4395
4396
4397
4398
4399
4400
4401
4402
4403
4404
4405
4406
4407
4408
4409
4410
4411
4412
4413
4414
4415
4416
4417
4418
4419
4420
4421
4422
4423
4424
4425
4426
4427
4428
4429
4430
4431
4432
4433
4434
4435
4436
4437
4438
4439
4440
4441
4442
4443
4444
4445
4446
4447
4448
4449
4450
4451
4452
4453
4454
4455
4456
4457
4458
4459
4460
4461
4462
4463
4464
4465
4466
4467
4468
4469
4470
4471
4472
4473
4474
4475
4476
4477
4478
4479
4480
4481
4482
4483
4484
4485
4486
4487
4488
4489
4490
4491
4492
4493
4494
4495
4496
4497
4498
4499
4500
4501
4502
4503
4504
4505
4506
4507
4508
4509
4510
4511
4512
4513
4514
4515
4516
4517
4518
4519
4520
4521
4522
4523
4524
4525
4526
4527
4528
4529
4530
4531
4532
4533
4534
4535
4536
4537
4538
4539
4540
4541
4542
4543
4544
4545
4546
4547
4548
4549
4550
4551
4552
4553
4554
4555
4556
4557
4558
4559
4560
4561
4562
4563
4564
4565
4566
4567
4568
4569
4570
4571
4572
4573
4574
4575
4576
4577
4578
4579
4580
4581
4582
4583
4584
4585
4586
4587
4588
4589
4590
4591
4592
4593
4594
4595
4596
4597
4598
4599
4600
4601
4602
4603
4604
4605
4606
4607
4608
4609
4610
4611
4612
4613
4614
4615
4616
4617
4618
4619
4620
4621
4622
4623
4624
4625
4626
4627
4628
4629
4630
4631
4632
4633
4634
4635
4636
4637
4638
4639
4640
4641
4642
4643
4644
4645
4646
4647
4648
4649
4650
4651
4652
4653
4654
4655
4656
4657
4658
4659
4660
4661
4662
4663
4664
4665
4666
4667
4668
4669
4670
4671
4672
4673
4674
4675
4676
4677
4678
4679
4680
4681
4682
4683
4684
4685
4686
4687
4688
4689
4690
4691
4692
4693
4694
4695
4696
4697
4698
4699
4700
4701
4702
4703
4704
4705
4706
4707
4708
4709
4710
4711
4712
4713
4714
4715
4716
4717
4718
4719
4720
4721
4722
4723
4724
4725
4726
4727
4728
4729
4730
4731
4732
4733
4734
4735
4736
4737
4738
4739
4740
4741
4742
4743
4744
4745
4746
4747
4748
4749
4750
4751
4752
4753
4754
4755
4756
4757
4758
4759
4760
4761
4762
4763
4764
4765
4766
4767
4768
4769
4770
4771
4772
4773
4774
4775
4776
4777
4778
4779
4780
4781
4782
4783
4784
4785
4786
4787
4788
4789
4790
4791
4792
4793
4794
4795
4796
4797
4798
4799
4800
4801
4802
4803
4804
4805
4806
4807
4808
4809
4810
4811
4812
4813
4814
4815
4816
4817
4818
4819
4820
4821
4822
4823
4824
4825
4826
4827
4828
4829
4830
4831
4832
4833
4834
4835
4836
4837
4838
4839
4840
4841
4842
4843
4844
4845
4846
4847
4848
4849
4850
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4856
4857
4858
4859
4860
4861
4862
4863
4864
4865
4866
4867
4868
4869
4870
4871
4872
4873
4874
4875
4876
4877
4878
4879
4880
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4886
4887
4888
4889
4890
4891
4892
4893
4894
4895
4896
4897
4898
4899
4900
4901
4902
4903
4904
4905
4906
4907
4908
4909
4910
4911
4912
4913
4914
4915
4916
4917
4918
4919
4920
4921
4922
4923
4924
4925
4926
4927
4928
4929
4930
4931
4932
4933
4934
4935
4936
4937
4938
4939
4940
4941
4942
4943
4944
4945
4946
4947
4948
4949
4950
4951
4952
4953
4954
4955
4956
4957
4958
4959
4960
4961
4962
4963
4964
4965
4966
4967
4968
4969
4970
4971
4972
4973
4974
4975
4976
4977
4978
4979
4980
4981
4982
4983
4984
4985
4986
4987
4988
4989
4990
4991
4992
4993
4994
4995
4996
4997
4998
4999
5000
5001
5002
5003
5004
5005
5006
5007
5008
5009
5010
5011
5012
5013
5014
5015
5016
5017
5018
5019
5020
5021
5022
5023
5024
5025
5026
5027
5028
5029
5030
5031
5032
5033
5034
5035
5036
5037
5038
5039
5040
5041
5042
5043
5044
5045
5046
5047
5048
5049
5050
5051
5052
5053
5054
5055
5056
5057
5058
5059
5060
5061
5062
5063
5064
5065
5066
5067
5068
5069
5070
5071
5072
5073
5074
5075
5076
5077
5078
5079
5080
5081
5082
5083
5084
5085
5086
5087
5088
5089
5090
5091
5092
5093
5094
5095
5096
5097
5098
5099
5100
5101
5102
5103
5104
5105
5106
5107
5108
5109
5110
5111
5112
5113
5114
5115
5116
5117
5118
5119
5120
5121
5122
5123
5124
5125
5126
5127
5128
5129
5130
5131
5132
5133
5134
5135
5136
5137
5138
5139
5140
5141
5142
5143
5144
5145
5146
5147
5148
5149
5150
5151
5152
5153
5154
5155
5156
5157
5158
5159
5160
5161
5162
5163
5164
5165
5166
5167
5168
5169
5170
5171
5172
5173
5174
5175
5176
5177
5178
5179
5180
5181
5182
5183
5184
5185
5186
5187
5188
5189
5190
5191
5192
5193
5194
5195
5196
5197
5198
5199
5200
5201
5202
5203
5204
5205
5206
5207
5208
5209
5210
5211
5212
5213
5214
5215
5216
5217
5218
5219
5220
5221
5222
5223
5224
5225
5226
5227
5228
5229
5230
5231
5232
5233
5234
5235
5236
5237
5238
5239
5240
5241
5242
5243
5244
5245
5246
5247
5248
5249
5250
5251
5252
5253
5254
5255
5256
5257
5258
5259
5260
5261
5262
5263
5264
5265
5266
5267
5268
5269
5270
5271
5272
5273
5274
5275
5276
5277
5278
5279
5280
5281
5282
5283
5284
5285
5286
5287
5288
5289
5290
5291
5292
5293
5294
5295
5296
5297
5298
5299
5300
5301
5302
5303
5304
5305
5306
5307
5308
5309
5310
5311
5312
5313
5314
5315
5316
5317
5318
5319
5320
5321
5322
5323
5324
5325
5326
5327
5328
5329
5330
5331
5332
5333
5334
5335
5336
5337
5338
5339
5340
5341
5342
5343
5344
5345
5346
5347
5348
5349
5350
5351
5352
5353
5354
5355
5356
5357
5358
5359
5360
5361
5362
5363
5364
5365
5366
5367
5368
5369
5370
5371
5372
5373
5374
5375
5376
5377
5378
5379
5380
5381
5382
5383
5384
5385
5386
5387
5388
5389
5390
5391
5392
5393
5394
5395
5396
5397
5398
5399
5400
5401
5402
5403
5404
5405
5406
5407
5408
5409
5410
5411
5412
5413
5414
5415
5416
5417
5418
5419
5420
5421
5422
5423
5424
5425
5426
5427
5428
5429
5430
5431
5432
5433
5434
5435
5436
5437
5438
5439
5440
5441
5442
5443
5444
5445
5446
5447
5448
5449
5450
5451
5452
5453
5454
5455
5456
5457
5458
5459
5460
5461
5462
5463
5464
5465
5466
5467
5468
5469
5470
5471
5472
5473
5474
5475
5476
5477
5478
5479
5480
5481
5482
5483
5484
5485
5486
5487
5488
5489
5490
5491
5492
5493
5494
5495
5496
5497
5498
5499
5500
5501
5502
5503
5504
5505
5506
5507
5508
5509
5510
5511
5512
5513
5514
5515
5516
5517
5518
5519
5520
5521
5522
5523
5524
5525
5526
5527
5528
5529
5530
5531
5532
5533
5534
5535
5536
5537
5538
5539
5540
5541
5542
5543
5544
5545
5546
5547
5548
5549
5550
5551
5552
5553
5554
5555
5556
5557
5558
5559
5560
5561
5562
5563
5564
5565
5566
5567
5568
5569
5570
5571
5572
5573
5574
5575
5576
5577
5578
5579
5580
5581
5582
5583
5584
5585
5586
5587
5588
5589
5590
5591
5592
5593
5594
5595
5596
5597
5598
5599
5600
5601
5602
5603
5604
5605
5606
5607
5608
5609
5610
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5618
5619
5620
5621
5622
5623
5624
5625
5626
5627
5628
5629
5630
5631
5632
5633
5634
5635
5636
5637
5638
5639
5640
5641
5642
5643
5644
5645
5646
5647
5648
5649
5650
5651
5652
5653
5654
5655
5656
5657
5658
5659
5660
5661
5662
5663
5664
5665
5666
5667
5668
5669
5670
5671
5672
5673
5674
5675
5676
5677
5678
5679
5680
5681
5682
5683
5684
5685
5686
5687
5688
5689
5690
5691
5692
5693
5694
5695
5696
5697
5698
5699
5700
5701
5702
5703
5704
5705
5706
5707
5708
5709
5710
5711
5712
5713
5714
5715
5716
5717
5718
5719
5720
5721
5722
5723
5724
5725
5726
5727
5728
5729
5730
5731
5732
5733
5734
5735
5736
5737
5738
5739
5740
5741
5742
5743
5744
5745
5746
5747
5748
5749
5750
5751
5752
5753
5754
5755
5756
5757
5758
5759
5760
5761
5762
5763
5764
5765
5766
5767
5768
5769
5770
5771
5772
5773
5774
5775
5776
5777
5778
5779
5780
5781
5782
5783
5784
5785
5786
5787
5788
5789
5790
5791
5792
5793
5794
5795
5796
5797
5798
5799
5800
5801
5802
5803
5804
5805
5806
5807
5808
5809
5810
5811
5812
5813
5814
5815
5816
5817
5818
5819
5820
5821
5822
5823
5824
5825
5826
5827
5828
5829
5830
5831
5832
5833
5834
5835
5836
5837
5838
5839
5840
5841
5842
5843
5844
5845
5846
5847
5848
5849
5850
5851
5852
5853
5854
5855
5856
5857
5858
5859
5860
5861
5862
5863
5864
5865
5866
5867
5868
5869
5870
5871
5872
5873
5874
5875
5876
5877
5878
5879
5880
5881
5882
5883
5884
5885
5886
5887
5888
5889
5890
5891
5892
5893
5894
5895
5896
5897
5898
5899
5900
5901
5902
5903
5904
5905
5906
5907
5908
5909
5910
5911
5912
5913
5914
5915
5916
5917
5918
5919
5920
5921
5922
5923
5924
5925
5926
5927
5928
5929
5930
5931
5932
5933
5934
5935
5936
5937
5938
5939
5940
5941
5942
5943
5944
5945
5946
5947
5948
5949
5950
5951
5952
5953
5954
5955
5956
5957
5958
5959
5960
5961
5962
5963
5964
5965
5966
5967
5968
5969
5970
5971
5972
5973
5974
5975
5976
5977
5978
5979
5980
5981
5982
5983
5984
5985
5986
5987
5988
5989
5990
5991
5992
5993
5994
5995
5996
5997
5998
5999
6000
6001
6002
6003
6004
6005
6006
6007
6008
6009
6010
6011
6012
6013
6014
6015
6016
6017
6018
6019
6020
6021
6022
6023
6024
6025
6026
6027
6028
6029
6030
6031
6032
6033
6034
6035
6036
6037
6038
6039
6040
6041
6042
6043
6044
6045
6046
6047
6048
6049
6050
6051
6052
6053
6054
6055
6056
6057
6058
6059
6060
6061
6062
6063
6064
6065
6066
6067
6068
6069
6070
6071
6072
6073
6074
6075
6076
6077
6078
6079
6080
6081
6082
6083
6084
6085
6086
6087
6088
6089
6090
6091
6092
6093
6094
6095
6096
6097
6098
6099
6100
6101
6102
6103
6104
6105
6106
6107
6108
6109
6110
6111
6112
6113
6114
6115
6116
6117
6118
6119
6120
6121
6122
6123
6124
6125
6126
6127
6128
6129
6130
6131
6132
6133
6134
6135
6136
6137
6138
6139
6140
6141
6142
6143
6144
6145
6146
6147
6148
6149
6150
6151
6152
6153
6154
6155
6156
6157
6158
6159
6160
6161
6162
6163
6164
6165
6166
6167
6168
6169
6170
6171
6172
6173
6174
6175
6176
6177
6178
6179
6180
6181
6182
6183
6184
6185
6186
6187
6188
6189
6190
6191
6192
6193
6194
6195
6196
6197
6198
6199
6200
6201
6202
6203
6204
6205
6206
6207
6208
6209
6210
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6217
6218
6219
6220
6221
6222
6223
6224
6225
6226
6227
6228
6229
6230
6231
6232
6233
6234
6235
6236
6237
6238
6239
6240
6241
6242
6243
6244
6245
6246
6247
6248
6249
6250
6251
6252
6253
6254
6255
6256
6257
6258
6259
6260
6261
6262
6263
6264
6265
6266
6267
6268
6269
6270
6271
6272
6273
6274
6275
6276
6277
6278
6279
6280
6281
6282
6283
6284
6285
6286
6287
6288
6289
6290
6291
6292
6293
6294
6295
6296
6297
6298
6299
6300
6301
6302
6303
6304
6305
6306
6307
6308
6309
6310
6311
6312
6313
6314
6315
6316
6317
6318
6319
6320
6321
6322
6323
6324
6325
6326
6327
6328
6329
6330
6331
6332
6333
6334
6335
6336
6337
6338
6339
6340
6341
6342
6343
6344
6345
6346
6347
6348
6349
6350
6351
6352
6353
6354
6355
6356
6357
6358
6359
6360
6361
6362
6363
6364
6365
6366
6367
6368
6369
6370
6371
6372
6373
6374
6375
6376
6377
6378
6379
6380
6381
6382
6383
6384
6385
6386
6387
6388
6389
6390
6391
6392
6393
6394
6395
6396
6397
6398
6399
6400
6401
6402
6403
6404
6405
6406
6407
6408
6409
6410
6411
6412
6413
6414
6415
6416
6417
6418
6419
6420
6421
6422
6423
6424
6425
6426
6427
6428
6429
6430
6431
6432
6433
6434
6435
6436
6437
6438
6439
6440
6441
6442
6443
6444
6445
6446
6447
6448
6449
6450
6451
6452
6453
6454
6455
6456
6457
6458
6459
6460
6461
6462
6463
6464
6465
6466
6467
6468
6469
6470
6471
6472
6473
6474
6475
6476
6477
6478
6479
6480
6481
6482
6483
6484
6485
6486
6487
6488
6489
6490
6491
6492
6493
6494
6495
6496
6497
6498
6499
6500
6501
6502
6503
6504
6505
6506
6507
6508
6509
6510
6511
6512
6513
6514
6515
6516
6517
6518
6519
6520
6521
6522
6523
6524
6525
6526
6527
6528
6529
6530
6531
6532
6533
6534
6535
6536
6537
6538
6539
6540
6541
6542
6543
6544
6545
6546
6547
6548
6549
6550
6551
6552
6553
6554
6555
6556
6557
6558
6559
6560
6561
6562
6563
6564
6565
6566
6567
6568
6569
6570
6571
6572
6573
6574
6575
6576
6577
6578
6579
6580
6581
6582
6583
6584
6585
6586
6587
6588
6589
6590
6591
6592
6593
6594
6595
6596
6597
6598
6599
6600
6601
6602
6603
6604
6605
6606
6607
6608
6609
6610
6611
6612
6613
6614
6615
6616
6617
6618
6619
6620
6621
6622
6623
6624
6625
6626
6627
6628
6629
6630
6631
6632
6633
6634
6635
6636
6637
6638
6639
6640
6641
6642
6643
6644
6645
6646
6647
6648
6649
6650
6651
6652
6653
6654
6655
6656
6657
6658
6659
6660
6661
6662
6663
6664
6665
6666
6667
6668
6669
6670
6671
6672
6673
6674
6675
6676
6677
6678
6679
6680
6681
6682
6683
6684
6685
6686
6687
6688
6689
6690
6691
6692
6693
6694
6695
6696
6697
6698
6699
6700
6701
6702
6703
6704
6705
6706
6707
6708
6709
6710
6711
6712
6713
6714
6715
6716
6717
6718
6719
6720
6721
6722
6723
6724
6725
6726
6727
6728
6729
6730
6731
6732
6733
6734
6735
6736
6737
6738
6739
6740
6741
6742
6743
6744
6745
6746
6747
6748
6749
6750
6751
6752
6753
6754
6755
6756
6757
6758
6759
6760
6761
6762
6763
6764
6765
6766
6767
6768
6769
6770
6771
6772
6773
6774
6775
6776
6777
6778
6779
6780
6781
6782
6783
6784
6785
6786
6787
6788
6789
6790
6791
6792
6793
6794
6795
6796
6797
6798
6799
6800
6801
6802
6803
6804
6805
6806
6807
6808
6809
6810
6811
6812
6813
6814
6815
6816
6817
6818
6819
6820
6821
6822
6823
6824
6825
6826
6827
6828
6829
6830
6831
6832
6833
6834
6835
6836
6837
6838
6839
6840
6841
6842
6843
6844
6845
6846
6847
6848
6849
6850
6851
6852
6853
6854
6855
6856
6857
6858
6859
6860
6861
6862
6863
6864
6865
6866
6867
6868
6869
6870
6871
6872
6873
6874
6875
6876
6877
6878
6879
6880
6881
6882
6883
6884
6885
6886
6887
6888
6889
6890
6891
6892
6893
6894
6895
6896
6897
6898
6899
6900
6901
6902
6903
6904
6905
6906
6907
6908
6909
6910
6911
6912
6913
6914
6915
6916
6917
6918
6919
6920
6921
6922
6923
6924
6925
6926
6927
6928
6929
6930
6931
6932
6933
6934
6935
6936
6937
6938
6939
6940
6941
6942
6943
6944
6945
6946
6947
6948
6949
6950
6951
6952
6953
6954
6955
6956
6957
6958
6959
6960
6961
6962
6963
6964
6965
6966
6967
6968
6969
6970
6971
6972
6973
6974
6975
6976
6977
6978
6979
6980
6981
6982
6983
6984
6985
6986
6987
6988
6989
6990
6991
6992
6993
6994
6995
6996
6997
6998
6999
7000
7001
7002
7003
7004
7005
7006
7007
7008
7009
7010
7011
7012
7013
7014
7015
7016
7017
7018
7019
7020
7021
7022
7023
7024
7025
7026
7027
7028
7029
7030
7031
7032
7033
7034
7035
7036
7037
7038
7039
7040
7041
7042
7043
7044
7045
7046
7047
7048
7049
7050
7051
7052
7053
7054
7055
7056
7057
7058
7059
7060
7061
7062
7063
7064
7065
7066
7067
7068
7069
7070
7071
7072
7073
7074
7075
7076
7077
7078
7079
7080
7081
7082
7083
7084
7085
7086
7087
7088
7089
7090
7091
7092
7093
7094
7095
7096
7097
7098
7099
7100
7101
7102
7103
7104
7105
7106
7107
7108
7109
7110
7111
7112
7113
7114
7115
7116
7117
7118
7119
7120
7121
7122
7123
7124
7125
7126
7127
7128
7129
7130
7131
7132
7133
7134
7135
7136
7137
7138
7139
7140
7141
7142
7143
7144
7145
7146
7147
7148
7149
7150
7151
7152
7153
7154
7155
7156
7157
7158
7159
7160
7161
7162
7163
7164
7165
7166
7167
7168
7169
7170
7171
7172
7173
7174
7175
7176
7177
7178
7179
7180
7181
7182
7183
7184
7185
7186
7187
7188
7189
7190
7191
7192
7193
7194
7195
7196
7197
7198
7199
7200
7201
7202
7203
7204
7205
7206
7207
7208
7209
7210
7211
7212
7213
7214
7215
7216
7217
7218
7219
7220
7221
7222
7223
7224
7225
7226
7227
7228
7229
7230
7231
7232
7233
7234
7235
7236
7237
7238
7239
7240
7241
7242
7243
7244
7245
7246
7247
7248
7249
7250
7251
7252
7253
7254
7255
7256
7257
7258
7259
7260
7261
7262
7263
7264
7265
7266
7267
7268
7269
7270
7271
7272
7273
7274
7275
7276
7277
7278
7279
7280
7281
7282
7283
7284
7285
7286
7287
7288
7289
7290
7291
7292
7293
7294
7295
7296
7297
7298
7299
7300
7301
7302
7303
7304
7305
7306
7307
7308
7309
7310
7311
7312
7313
7314
7315
7316
7317
7318
7319
7320
7321
7322
7323
7324
7325
7326
7327
7328
7329
7330
7331
7332
7333
7334
7335
7336
7337
7338
7339
7340
7341
7342
7343
7344
7345
7346
7347
7348
7349
7350
7351
7352
7353
7354
7355
7356
7357
7358
7359
7360
7361
7362
7363
7364
7365
7366
7367
7368
7369
7370
7371
7372
7373
7374
7375
7376
7377
7378
7379
7380
7381
7382
7383
7384
7385
7386
7387
7388
7389
7390
7391
7392
7393
7394
7395
7396
7397
7398
7399
7400
7401
7402
7403
7404
7405
7406
7407
7408
7409
7410
7411
7412
7413
7414
7415
7416
7417
7418
7419
7420
7421
7422
7423
7424
7425
7426
7427
7428
7429
7430
7431
7432
7433
7434
7435
7436
7437
7438
7439
7440
7441
7442
7443
7444
7445
7446
7447
7448
7449
7450
7451
7452
7453
7454
7455
7456
7457
7458
7459
7460
7461
7462
7463
7464
7465
7466
7467
7468
7469
7470
7471
7472
7473
7474
7475
7476
7477
7478
7479
7480
7481
7482
7483
7484
7485
7486
7487
7488
7489
7490
7491
7492
7493
7494
7495
7496
7497
7498
7499
7500
7501
7502
7503
7504
7505
7506
7507
7508
7509
7510
7511
7512
7513
7514
7515
7516
7517
7518
7519
7520
7521
7522
7523
7524
7525
7526
7527
7528
7529
7530
7531
7532
7533
7534
7535
7536
7537
7538
7539
7540
7541
7542
7543
7544
7545
7546
7547
7548
7549
7550
7551
7552
7553
7554
7555
7556
7557
7558
7559
7560
7561
7562
7563
7564
7565
7566
7567
7568
7569
7570
7571
7572
7573
7574
7575
7576
7577
7578
7579
7580
7581
7582
7583
7584
7585
7586
7587
7588
7589
7590
7591
7592
7593
7594
7595
7596
7597
7598
7599
7600
7601
7602
7603
7604
7605
7606
7607
7608
7609
7610
7611
7612
7613
7614
7615
7616
7617
7618
7619
7620
7621
7622
7623
7624
7625
7626
7627
7628
7629
7630
7631
7632
7633
7634
7635
7636
7637
7638
7639
7640
7641
7642
7643
7644
7645
7646
7647
7648
7649
7650
7651
7652
7653
7654
7655
7656
7657
7658
7659
7660
7661
7662
7663
7664
7665
7666
7667
7668
7669
7670
7671
7672
7673
7674
7675
7676
7677
7678
7679
7680
7681
7682
7683
7684
7685
7686
7687
7688
7689
7690
7691
7692
7693
7694
7695
7696
7697
7698
7699
7700
7701
7702
7703
7704
7705
7706
7707
7708
7709
7710
7711
7712
7713
7714
7715
7716
7717
7718
7719
7720
7721
7722
7723
7724
7725
7726
7727
7728
7729
7730
7731
7732
7733
7734
7735
7736
7737
7738
7739
7740
7741
7742
7743
7744
7745
7746
7747
7748
7749
7750
7751
7752
7753
7754
7755
7756
7757
7758
7759
7760
7761
7762
7763
7764
7765
7766
7767
7768
7769
7770
7771
7772
7773
7774
7775
7776
7777
7778
7779
7780
7781
7782
7783
7784
7785
7786
7787
7788
7789
7790
7791
7792
7793
7794
7795
7796
7797
7798
7799
7800
7801
7802
7803
7804
7805
7806
7807
7808
7809
7810
7811
7812
7813
7814
7815
7816
7817
7818
7819
7820
7821
7822
7823
7824
7825
7826
7827
7828
7829
7830
7831
7832
7833
7834
7835
7836
7837
7838
7839
7840
7841
7842
7843
7844
7845
7846
7847
7848
7849
7850
7851
7852
7853
7854
7855
7856
7857
7858
7859
7860
7861
7862
7863
7864
7865
7866
7867
7868
7869
7870
7871
7872
7873
7874
7875
7876
7877
7878
7879
7880
7881
7882
7883
7884
7885
7886
7887
7888
7889
7890
7891
7892
7893
7894
7895
7896
7897
7898
7899
7900
7901
7902
7903
7904
7905
7906
7907
7908
7909
7910
7911
7912
7913
7914
7915
7916
7917
7918
7919
7920
7921
7922
7923
7924
7925
7926
7927
7928
7929
7930
7931
7932
7933
7934
7935
7936
7937
7938
7939
7940
7941
7942
7943
7944
7945
7946
7947
7948
7949
7950
7951
7952
7953
7954
7955
7956
7957
7958
7959
7960
7961
7962
7963
7964
7965
7966
7967
7968
7969
7970
7971
7972
7973
7974
7975
7976
7977
7978
7979
7980
7981
7982
7983
7984
7985
7986
7987
7988
7989
7990
7991
7992
7993
7994
7995
7996
7997
7998
7999
8000
8001
8002
8003
8004
8005
8006
8007
8008
8009
8010
8011
8012
8013
8014
8015
8016
8017
8018
8019
8020
8021
8022
8023
8024
8025
8026
8027
8028
8029
8030
8031
8032
8033
8034
8035
8036
8037
8038
8039
8040
8041
8042
8043
8044
8045
8046
8047
8048
8049
8050
8051
8052
8053
8054
8055
8056
8057
8058
8059
8060
8061
8062
8063
8064
8065
8066
8067
8068
8069
8070
8071
8072
8073
8074
8075
8076
8077
8078
8079
8080
8081
8082
8083
8084
8085
8086
8087
8088
8089
8090
8091
8092
8093
8094
8095
8096
8097
8098
8099
8100
8101
8102
8103
8104
8105
8106
8107
8108
8109
8110
8111
8112
8113
8114
8115
8116
8117
8118
8119
8120
8121
8122
8123
8124
8125
8126
8127
8128
8129
8130
8131
8132
8133
8134
8135
8136
8137
8138
8139
8140
8141
8142
8143
8144
8145
8146
8147
8148
8149
8150
8151
8152
8153
8154
8155
8156
8157
8158
8159
8160
8161
8162
8163
8164
8165
8166
8167
8168
8169
8170
8171
8172
8173
8174
8175
8176
8177
8178
8179
8180
8181
8182
8183
8184
8185
8186
8187
8188
8189
8190
8191
8192
8193
8194
8195
8196
8197
8198
8199
8200
8201
8202
8203
8204
8205
8206
8207
8208
8209
8210
8211
8212
8213
8214
8215
8216
8217
8218
8219
8220
8221
8222
8223
8224
8225
8226
8227
8228
8229
8230
8231
8232
8233
8234
8235
8236
8237
8238
8239
8240
8241
8242
8243
8244
8245
8246
8247
8248
8249
8250
8251
8252
8253
8254
8255
8256
8257
8258
8259
8260
8261
8262
8263
8264
8265
8266
8267
8268
8269
8270
8271
8272
8273
8274
8275
8276
8277
8278
8279
8280
8281
8282
8283
8284
8285
8286
8287
8288
8289
8290
8291
8292
8293
8294
8295
8296
8297
8298
8299
8300
8301
8302
8303
8304
8305
8306
8307
8308
8309
8310
8311
8312
8313
8314
8315
8316
8317
8318
8319
8320
8321
8322
8323
8324
8325
8326
8327
8328
8329
8330
8331
8332
8333
8334
8335
8336
8337
8338
8339
8340
8341
8342
8343
8344
8345
8346
8347
8348
8349
8350
8351
8352
8353
8354
8355
8356
8357
8358
8359
8360
8361
8362
8363
8364
8365
8366
8367
8368
8369
8370
8371
8372
8373
8374
8375
8376
8377
8378
8379
8380
8381
8382
8383
8384
8385
8386
8387
8388
8389
8390
8391
8392
8393
8394
8395
8396
8397
8398
8399
8400
8401
8402
8403
8404
8405
8406
8407
8408
8409
8410
8411
8412
8413
8414
8415
8416
8417
8418
8419
8420
8421
8422
8423
8424
8425
8426
8427
8428
8429
8430
8431
8432
8433
8434
8435
8436
8437
8438
8439
8440
8441
8442
8443
8444
8445
8446
8447
8448
8449
8450
8451
8452
8453
8454
8455
8456
8457
8458
8459
8460
8461
8462
8463
8464
8465
8466
8467
8468
8469
8470
8471
8472
8473
8474
8475
8476
8477
8478
8479
8480
8481
8482
8483
8484
8485
8486
8487
8488
8489
8490
8491
8492
8493
8494
8495
8496
8497
8498
8499
8500
8501
8502
8503
8504
8505
8506
8507
8508
8509
8510
8511
8512
8513
8514
8515
8516
8517
8518
8519
8520
8521
8522
8523
8524
8525
8526
8527
8528
8529
8530
8531
8532
8533
8534
8535
8536
8537
8538
8539
8540
8541
8542
8543
8544
8545
8546
8547
8548
8549
8550
8551
8552
8553
8554
8555
8556
8557
8558
8559
8560
8561
8562
8563
8564
8565
8566
8567
8568
8569
8570
8571
8572
8573
8574
8575
8576
8577
8578
8579
8580
8581
8582
8583
8584
8585
8586
8587
8588
8589
8590
8591
8592
8593
8594
8595
8596
8597
8598
8599
8600
8601
8602
8603
8604
8605
8606
8607
8608
8609
8610
8611
8612
8613
8614
8615
8616
8617
8618
8619
8620
8621
8622
8623
8624
8625
8626
8627
8628
8629
8630
8631
8632
8633
8634
8635
8636
8637
8638
8639
8640
8641
8642
8643
8644
8645
8646
8647
8648
8649
8650
8651
8652
8653
8654
8655
8656
8657
8658
8659
8660
8661
8662
8663
8664
8665
8666
8667
8668
8669
8670
8671
8672
8673
8674
8675
8676
8677
8678
8679
8680
8681
8682
8683
8684
8685
8686
8687
8688
8689
8690
8691
8692
8693
8694
8695
8696
8697
8698
8699
8700
8701
8702
8703
8704
8705
8706
8707
8708
8709
8710
8711
8712
8713
8714
8715
8716
8717
8718
8719
8720
8721
8722
8723
8724
8725
8726
8727
8728
8729
8730
8731
8732
8733
8734
8735
8736
8737
8738
8739
8740
8741
8742
8743
8744
8745
8746
8747
8748
8749
8750
8751
8752
8753
8754
8755
8756
8757
8758
8759
8760
8761
8762
8763
8764
8765
8766
8767
8768
8769
8770
8771
8772
8773
8774
8775
8776
8777
8778
8779
8780
8781
8782
8783
8784
8785
8786
8787
8788
8789
8790
8791
8792
8793
8794
8795
8796
8797
8798
8799
8800
8801
8802
8803
8804
8805
8806
8807
8808
8809
8810
8811
8812
8813
8814
8815
8816
8817
8818
8819
8820
8821
8822
8823
8824
8825
8826
8827
8828
8829
8830
8831
8832
8833
8834
8835
8836
8837
8838
8839
8840
8841
8842
8843
8844
8845
8846
8847
8848
8849
8850
8851
8852
8853
8854
8855
8856
8857
8858
8859
8860
8861
8862
8863
8864
8865
8866
8867
8868
8869
8870
8871
8872
8873
8874
8875
8876
8877
8878
8879
8880
8881
8882
8883
8884
8885
8886
8887
8888
8889
8890
8891
8892
8893
8894
8895
8896
8897
8898
8899
8900
8901
8902
8903
8904
8905
8906
8907
8908
8909
8910
8911
8912
8913
8914
8915
8916
8917
8918
8919
8920
8921
8922
8923
8924
8925
8926
8927
8928
8929
8930
8931
8932
8933
8934
8935
8936
8937
8938
8939
8940
8941
8942
8943
8944
8945
8946
8947
8948
8949
8950
8951
8952
8953
8954
8955
8956
8957
8958
8959
8960
8961
8962
8963
8964
8965
8966
8967
8968
8969
8970
8971
8972
8973
8974
8975
8976
8977
8978
8979
8980
8981
8982
8983
8984
8985
8986
8987
8988
8989
8990
8991
8992
8993
8994
8995
8996
8997
8998
8999
9000
9001
9002
9003
9004
9005
9006
9007
9008
9009
9010
9011
9012
9013
9014
9015
9016
9017
9018
9019
9020
9021
9022
9023
9024
9025
9026
9027
9028
9029
9030
9031
9032
9033
9034
9035
9036
9037
9038
9039
9040
9041
9042
9043
9044
9045
9046
9047
9048
9049
9050
9051
9052
9053
9054
9055
9056
9057
9058
9059
9060
9061
9062
9063
9064
9065
9066
9067
9068
9069
9070
9071
9072
9073
9074
9075
9076
9077
9078
9079
9080
9081
9082
9083
9084
9085
9086
9087
9088
9089
9090
9091
9092
9093
9094
9095
9096
9097
9098
9099
9100
9101
9102
9103
9104
9105
9106
9107
9108
9109
9110
9111
9112
9113
9114
9115
9116
9117
9118
9119
9120
9121
9122
9123
9124
9125
9126
9127
9128
9129
9130
9131
9132
9133
9134
9135
9136
9137
9138
9139
9140
9141
9142
9143
9144
9145
9146
9147
9148
9149
9150
9151
9152
9153
9154
9155
9156
9157
9158
9159
9160
9161
9162
9163
9164
9165
9166
9167
9168
9169
9170
9171
9172
9173
9174
9175
9176
9177
9178
9179
9180
9181
9182
9183
9184
9185
9186
9187
9188
9189
9190
9191
9192
9193
9194
9195
9196
9197
9198
9199
9200
9201
9202
9203
9204
9205
9206
9207
9208
9209
9210
9211
9212
9213
9214
9215
9216
9217
9218
9219
9220
9221
9222
9223
9224
9225
9226
9227
9228
9229
9230
9231
9232
9233
9234
9235
9236
9237
9238
9239
9240
9241
9242
9243
9244
9245
9246
9247
9248
9249
9250
9251
9252
9253
9254
9255
9256
9257
9258
9259
9260
9261
9262
9263
9264
9265
9266
9267
9268
9269
9270
9271
9272
9273
9274
9275
9276
9277
9278
9279
9280
9281
9282
9283
9284
9285
9286
9287
9288
9289
9290
9291
9292
9293
9294
9295
9296
9297
9298
9299
9300
9301
9302
9303
9304
9305
9306
9307
9308
9309
9310
9311
9312
9313
9314
9315
9316
9317
9318
9319
9320
9321
9322
9323
9324
9325
9326
9327
9328
9329
9330
9331
9332
9333
9334
9335
9336
9337
9338
9339
9340
9341
9342
9343
9344
9345
9346
9347
9348
9349
9350
9351
9352
9353
9354
9355
9356
9357
9358
9359
9360
9361
9362
9363
9364
9365
9366
9367
9368
9369
9370
9371
9372
9373
9374
9375
9376
9377
9378
9379
9380
9381
9382
9383
9384
9385
9386
9387
9388
9389
9390
9391
9392
9393
9394
9395
9396
9397
9398
9399
9400
9401
9402
9403
9404
9405
9406
9407
9408
9409
9410
9411
9412
9413
9414
9415
9416
9417
9418
9419
9420
9421
9422
9423
9424
9425
9426
9427
9428
9429
9430
9431
9432
9433
9434
9435
9436
9437
9438
9439
9440
9441
9442
9443
9444
9445
9446
9447
9448
9449
9450
9451
9452
9453
9454
9455
9456
9457
9458
9459
9460
9461
9462
9463
9464
9465
9466
9467
9468
9469
9470
9471
9472
9473
9474
9475
9476
9477
9478
9479
9480
9481
9482
9483
9484
9485
9486
9487
9488
9489
9490
9491
9492
9493
9494
9495
9496
9497
9498
9499
9500
9501
9502
9503
9504
9505
9506
9507
9508
9509
9510
9511
9512
9513
9514
9515
9516
9517
9518
9519
9520
9521
9522
9523
9524
9525
9526
9527
9528
9529
9530
9531
9532
9533
9534
9535
9536
9537
9538
9539
9540
9541
9542
9543
9544
9545
9546
9547
9548
9549
9550
9551
9552
9553
9554
9555
9556
9557
9558
9559
9560
9561
9562
9563
9564
9565
9566
9567
9568
9569
9570
9571
9572
9573
9574
9575
9576
9577
9578
9579
9580
9581
9582
9583
9584
9585
9586
9587
9588
9589
9590
9591
9592
9593
9594
9595
9596
9597
9598
9599
9600
9601
9602
9603
9604
9605
9606
9607
9608
9609
9610
9611
9612
9613
9614
9615
9616
9617
9618
9619
9620
9621
9622
9623
9624
9625
9626
9627
9628
9629
9630
9631
9632
9633
9634
9635
9636
9637
9638
9639
9640
9641
9642
9643
9644
9645
9646
9647
9648
9649
9650
9651
9652
9653
9654
9655
9656
9657
9658
9659
9660
9661
9662
9663
9664
9665
9666
9667
9668
9669
9670
9671
9672
9673
9674
9675
9676
9677
9678
9679
9680
9681
9682
9683
9684
9685
9686
9687
9688
9689
9690
9691
9692
9693
9694
9695
9696
9697
9698
9699
9700
9701
9702
9703
9704
9705
9706
9707
9708
9709
9710
9711
9712
9713
9714
9715
9716
9717
9718
9719
9720
9721
9722
9723
9724
9725
9726
9727
9728
9729
9730
9731
9732
9733
9734
9735
9736
9737
9738
9739
9740
9741
9742
9743
9744
9745
9746
9747
9748
9749
9750
9751
9752
9753
9754
9755
9756
9757
9758
9759
9760
9761
9762
9763
9764
9765
9766
9767
9768
9769
9770
9771
9772
9773
9774
9775
9776
9777
9778
9779
9780
9781
9782
9783
9784
9785
9786
9787
9788
9789
9790
9791
9792
9793
9794
9795
9796
9797
9798
9799
9800
9801
9802
9803
9804
9805
9806
9807
9808
9809
9810
9811
9812
9813
9814
9815
9816
9817
9818
9819
9820
9821
9822
9823
9824
9825
9826
9827
9828
9829
9830
9831
9832
9833
9834
9835
9836
9837
9838
9839
9840
9841
9842
9843
9844
9845
9846
9847
9848
9849
9850
9851
9852
9853
9854
9855
9856
9857
9858
9859
9860
9861
9862
9863
9864
9865
9866
9867
9868
9869
9870
9871
9872
9873
9874
9875
9876
9877
9878
9879
9880
9881
9882
9883
9884
9885
9886
9887
9888
9889
9890
9891
9892
9893
9894
9895
9896
9897
9898
9899
9900
9901
9902
9903
9904
9905
9906
9907
9908
9909
9910
9911
9912
9913
9914
9915
9916
9917
9918
9919
9920
9921
9922
9923
9924
9925
9926
9927
9928
9929
9930
9931
9932
9933
9934
9935
9936
9937
9938
9939
9940
9941
9942
9943
9944
9945
9946
9947
9948
9949
9950
9951
9952
9953
9954
9955
9956
9957
9958
9959
9960
9961
9962
9963
9964
9965
9966
9967
9968
9969
9970
9971
9972
9973
9974
9975
9976
9977
9978
9979
9980
9981
9982
9983
9984
9985
9986
9987
9988
9989
9990
9991
9992
9993
9994
9995
9996
9997
9998
9999
10000
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10007
10008
10009
10010
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
10019
10020
10021
10022
10023
10024
10025
10026
10027
10028
10029
10030
10031
10032
10033
10034
10035
10036
10037
10038
10039
10040
10041
10042
10043
10044
10045
10046
10047
10048
10049
10050
10051
10052
10053
10054
10055
10056
10057
10058
10059
10060
10061
10062
10063
10064
10065
10066
10067
10068
10069
10070
10071
10072
10073
10074
10075
10076
10077
10078
10079
10080
10081
10082
10083
10084
10085
10086
10087
10088
10089
10090
10091
10092
10093
10094
10095
10096
10097
10098
10099
10100
10101
10102
10103
10104
10105
10106
10107
10108
10109
10110
10111
10112
10113
10114
10115
10116
10117
10118
10119
10120
10121
10122
10123
10124
10125
10126
10127
10128
10129
10130
10131
10132
10133
10134
10135
10136
10137
10138
10139
10140
10141
10142
10143
10144
10145
10146
10147
10148
10149
10150
10151
10152
10153
10154
10155
10156
10157
10158
10159
10160
10161
10162
10163
10164
10165
10166
10167
10168
10169
10170
10171
10172
10173
10174
10175
10176
10177
10178
10179
10180
10181
10182
10183
10184
10185
10186
10187
10188
10189
10190
10191
10192
10193
10194
10195
10196
10197
10198
10199
10200
10201
10202
10203
10204
10205
10206
10207
10208
10209
10210
10211
10212
10213
10214
10215
10216
10217
10218
10219
10220
10221
10222
10223
10224
10225
10226
10227
10228
10229
10230
10231
10232
10233
10234
10235
10236
10237
10238
10239
10240
10241
10242
10243
10244
10245
10246
10247
10248
10249
10250
10251
10252
10253
10254
10255
10256
10257
10258
10259
10260
10261
10262
10263
10264
10265
10266
10267
10268
10269
10270
10271
10272
10273
10274
10275
10276
10277
10278
10279
10280
10281
10282
10283
10284
10285
10286
10287
10288
10289
10290
10291
10292
10293
10294
10295
10296
10297
10298
10299
10300
10301
10302
10303
10304
10305
10306
10307
10308
10309
10310
10311
10312
10313
10314
10315
10316
10317
10318
10319
10320
10321
10322
10323
10324
10325
10326
10327
10328
10329
10330
10331
10332
10333
10334
10335
10336
10337
10338
10339
10340
10341
10342
10343
10344
10345
10346
10347
10348
10349
10350
10351
10352
10353
10354
10355
10356
10357
10358
10359
10360
10361
10362
10363
10364
10365
10366
10367
10368
10369
10370
10371
10372
10373
10374
10375
10376
10377
10378
10379
10380
10381
10382
10383
10384
10385
10386
10387
10388
10389
10390
10391
10392
10393
10394
10395
10396
10397
10398
10399
10400
10401
10402
10403
10404
10405
10406
10407
10408
10409
10410
10411
10412
10413
10414
10415
10416
10417
10418
10419
10420
10421
10422
10423
10424
10425
10426
10427
10428
10429
10430
10431
10432
10433
10434
10435
10436
10437
10438
10439
10440
10441
10442
10443
10444
10445
10446
10447
10448
10449
10450
10451
10452
10453
10454
10455
10456
10457
10458
10459
10460
10461
10462
10463
10464
10465
10466
10467
10468
10469
10470
10471
10472
10473
10474
10475
10476
10477
10478
10479
10480
10481
10482
10483
10484
10485
10486
10487
10488
10489
10490
10491
10492
10493
10494
10495
10496
10497
10498
10499
10500
10501
10502
10503
10504
10505
10506
10507
10508
10509
10510
10511
10512
10513
10514
10515
10516
10517
10518
10519
10520
10521
10522
10523
10524
10525
10526
10527
10528
10529
10530
10531
10532
10533
10534
10535
10536
10537
10538
10539
10540
10541
10542
10543
10544
10545
10546
10547
10548
10549
10550
10551
10552
10553
10554
10555
10556
10557
10558
10559
10560
10561
10562
10563
10564
10565
10566
10567
10568
10569
10570
10571
10572
10573
10574
10575
10576
10577
10578
10579
10580
10581
10582
10583
10584
10585
10586
10587
10588
10589
10590
10591
10592
10593
10594
10595
10596
10597
10598
10599
10600
10601
10602
10603
10604
10605
10606
10607
10608
10609
10610
10611
10612
10613
10614
10615
10616
10617
10618
10619
10620
10621
10622
10623
10624
10625
10626
10627
10628
10629
10630
10631
10632
10633
10634
10635
10636
10637
10638
10639
10640
10641
10642
10643
10644
10645
10646
10647
10648
10649
10650
10651
10652
10653
10654
10655
10656
10657
10658
10659
10660
10661
10662
10663
10664
10665
10666
10667
10668
10669
10670
10671
10672
10673
10674
10675
10676
10677
10678
10679
10680
10681
10682
10683
10684
10685
10686
10687
10688
10689
10690
10691
10692
10693
10694
10695
10696
10697
10698
10699
10700
10701
10702
10703
10704
10705
10706
10707
10708
10709
10710
10711
10712
10713
10714
10715
10716
10717
10718
10719
10720
10721
10722
10723
10724
10725
10726
10727
10728
10729
10730
10731
10732
10733
10734
10735
10736
10737
10738
10739
10740
10741
10742
10743
10744
10745
10746
10747
10748
10749
10750
10751
10752
10753
10754
10755
10756
10757
10758
10759
10760
10761
10762
10763
10764
10765
10766
10767
10768
10769
10770
10771
10772
10773
10774
10775
10776
10777
10778
10779
10780
10781
10782
10783
10784
10785
10786
10787
10788
10789
10790
10791
10792
10793
10794
10795
10796
10797
10798
10799
10800
10801
10802
10803
10804
10805
10806
10807
10808
10809
10810
10811
10812
10813
10814
10815
10816
10817
10818
10819
10820
10821
10822
10823
10824
10825
10826
10827
10828
10829
10830
10831
10832
10833
10834
10835
10836
10837
10838
10839
10840
10841
10842
10843
10844
10845
10846
10847
10848
10849
10850
10851
10852
10853
10854
10855
10856
10857
10858
10859
10860
10861
10862
10863
10864
10865
10866
10867
10868
10869
10870
10871
10872
10873
10874
10875
10876
10877
10878
10879
10880
10881
10882
10883
10884
10885
10886
10887
10888
10889
10890
10891
10892
10893
10894
10895
10896
10897
10898
10899
10900
10901
10902
10903
10904
10905
10906
10907
10908
10909
10910
10911
10912
10913
10914
10915
10916
10917
10918
10919
10920
10921
10922
10923
10924
10925
10926
10927
10928
10929
10930
10931
10932
10933
10934
10935
10936
10937
10938
10939
10940
10941
10942
10943
10944
10945
10946
10947
10948
10949
10950
10951
10952
10953
10954
10955
10956
10957
10958
10959
10960
10961
10962
10963
10964
10965
10966
10967
10968
10969
10970
10971
10972
10973
10974
10975
10976
10977
10978
10979
10980
10981
10982
10983
10984
10985
10986
10987
10988
10989
10990
10991
10992
10993
10994
10995
10996
10997
10998
10999
11000
11001
11002
11003
11004
11005
11006
11007
11008
11009
11010
11011
11012
11013
11014
11015
11016
11017
11018
11019
11020
11021
11022
11023
11024
11025
11026
11027
11028
11029
11030
11031
11032
11033
11034
11035
11036
11037
11038
11039
11040
11041
11042
11043
11044
11045
11046
11047
11048
11049
11050
11051
11052
11053
11054
11055
11056
11057
11058
11059
11060
11061
11062
11063
11064
11065
11066
11067
11068
11069
11070
11071
11072
11073
11074
11075
11076
11077
11078
11079
11080
11081
11082
11083
11084
11085
11086
11087
11088
11089
11090
11091
11092
11093
11094
11095
11096
11097
11098
11099
11100
11101
11102
11103
11104
11105
11106
11107
11108
11109
11110
11111
11112
11113
11114
11115
11116
11117
11118
11119
11120
11121
11122
11123
11124
11125
11126
11127
11128
11129
11130
11131
11132
11133
11134
11135
11136
11137
11138
11139
11140
11141
11142
11143
11144
11145
11146
11147
11148
11149
11150
11151
11152
11153
11154
11155
11156
11157
11158
11159
11160
11161
11162
11163
11164
11165
11166
11167
11168
11169
11170
11171
11172
11173
11174
11175
11176
11177
11178
11179
11180
11181
11182
11183
11184
11185
11186
11187
11188
11189
11190
11191
11192
11193
11194
11195
11196
11197
11198
11199
11200
11201
11202
11203
11204
11205
11206
11207
11208
11209
11210
11211
11212
11213
11214
11215
11216
11217
11218
11219
11220
11221
11222
11223
11224
11225
11226
11227
11228
11229
11230
11231
11232
11233
11234
11235
11236
11237
11238
11239
11240
11241
11242
11243
11244
11245
11246
11247
11248
11249
11250
11251
11252
11253
11254
11255
11256
11257
11258
11259
11260
11261
11262
11263
11264
11265
11266
11267
11268
11269
11270
11271
11272
11273
11274
11275
11276
11277
11278
11279
11280
11281
11282
11283
11284
11285
11286
11287
11288
11289
11290
11291
11292
11293
11294
11295
11296
11297
11298
11299
11300
11301
11302
11303
11304
11305
11306
11307
11308
11309
11310
11311
11312
11313
11314
11315
11316
11317
11318
11319
11320
11321
11322
11323
11324
11325
11326
11327
11328
11329
11330
11331
11332
11333
11334
11335
11336
11337
11338
11339
11340
11341
11342
11343
11344
11345
11346
11347
11348
11349
11350
11351
11352
11353
11354
11355
11356
11357
11358
11359
11360
11361
11362
11363
11364
11365
11366
11367
11368
11369
11370
11371
11372
11373
11374
11375
11376
11377
11378
11379
11380
11381
11382
11383
11384
11385
11386
11387
11388
11389
11390
11391
11392
11393
11394
11395
11396
11397
11398
11399
11400
11401
11402
11403
11404
11405
11406
11407
11408
11409
11410
11411
11412
11413
11414
11415
11416
11417
11418
11419
11420
11421
11422
11423
11424
11425
11426
11427
11428
11429
11430
11431
11432
11433
11434
11435
11436
11437
11438
11439
11440
11441
11442
11443
11444
11445
11446
11447
11448
11449
11450
11451
11452
11453
11454
11455
11456
11457
11458
11459
11460
11461
11462
11463
11464
11465
11466
11467
11468
11469
11470
11471
11472
11473
11474
11475
11476
11477
11478
11479
11480
11481
11482
11483
11484
11485
11486
11487
11488
11489
11490
11491
11492
11493
11494
11495
11496
11497
11498
11499
11500
11501
11502
11503
11504
11505
11506
11507
11508
11509
11510
11511
11512
11513
11514
11515
11516
11517
11518
11519
11520
11521
11522
11523
11524
11525
11526
11527
11528
11529
11530
11531
11532
11533
11534
11535
11536
11537
11538
11539
11540
11541
11542
11543
11544
11545
11546
11547
11548
11549
11550
11551
11552
11553
11554
11555
11556
11557
11558
11559
11560
11561
11562
11563
11564
11565
11566
11567
11568
11569
11570
11571
11572
11573
11574
11575
11576
11577
11578
11579
11580
11581
11582
11583
11584
11585
11586
11587
11588
11589
11590
11591
11592
11593
11594
11595
11596
11597
11598
11599
11600
11601
11602
11603
11604
11605
11606
11607
11608
11609
11610
11611
11612
11613
11614
11615
11616
11617
11618
11619
11620
11621
11622
11623
11624
11625
11626
11627
11628
11629
11630
11631
11632
11633
11634
11635
11636
11637
11638
11639
11640
11641
11642
11643
11644
11645
11646
11647
11648
11649
11650
11651
11652
11653
11654
11655
11656
11657
11658
11659
11660
11661
11662
11663
11664
11665
11666
11667
11668
11669
11670
11671
11672
11673
11674
11675
11676
11677
11678
11679
11680
11681
11682
11683
11684
11685
11686
11687
11688
11689
11690
11691
11692
11693
11694
11695
11696
11697
11698
11699
11700
11701
11702
11703
11704
11705
11706
11707
11708
11709
11710
11711
11712
11713
11714
11715
11716
11717
11718
11719
11720
11721
11722
11723
11724
11725
11726
11727
11728
11729
11730
11731
11732
11733
11734
11735
11736
11737
11738
11739
11740
11741
11742
11743
11744
11745
11746
11747
11748
11749
11750
11751
11752
11753
11754
11755
11756
11757
11758
11759
11760
11761
11762
11763
11764
11765
11766
11767
11768
11769
11770
11771
11772
11773
11774
11775
11776
11777
11778
11779
11780
11781
11782
11783
11784
11785
11786
11787
11788
11789
11790
11791
11792
11793
11794
11795
11796
11797
11798
11799
11800
11801
11802
11803
11804
11805
11806
11807
11808
11809
11810
11811
11812
11813
11814
11815
11816
11817
11818
11819
11820
11821
11822
11823
11824
11825
11826
11827
11828
11829
11830
11831
11832
11833
11834
11835
11836
11837
11838
11839
11840
11841
11842
11843
11844
11845
11846
11847
11848
11849
11850
11851
11852
11853
11854
11855
11856
11857
11858
11859
11860
11861
11862
11863
11864
11865
11866
11867
11868
11869
11870
11871
11872
11873
11874
11875
11876
11877
11878
11879
11880
11881
11882
11883
11884
11885
11886
11887
11888
11889
11890
11891
11892
11893
11894
11895
11896
11897
11898
11899
11900
11901
11902
11903
11904
11905
11906
11907
11908
11909
11910
11911
11912
11913
11914
11915
11916
11917
11918
11919
11920
11921
11922
11923
11924
11925
11926
11927
11928
11929
11930
11931
11932
11933
11934
11935
11936
11937
11938
11939
11940
11941
11942
11943
11944
11945
11946
11947
11948
11949
11950
11951
11952
11953
11954
11955
11956
11957
11958
11959
11960
11961
11962
11963
11964
11965
11966
11967
11968
11969
11970
11971
11972
11973
11974
11975
11976
11977
11978
11979
11980
11981
11982
11983
11984
11985
11986
11987
11988
11989
11990
11991
11992
11993
11994
11995
11996
11997
11998
11999
12000
12001
12002
12003
12004
12005
12006
12007
12008
12009
12010
12011
12012
12013
12014
12015
12016
12017
12018
12019
12020
12021
12022
12023
12024
12025
12026
12027
12028
12029
12030
12031
12032
12033
12034
12035
12036
12037
12038
12039
12040
12041
12042
12043
12044
12045
12046
12047
12048
12049
12050
12051
12052
12053
12054
12055
12056
12057
12058
12059
12060
12061
12062
12063
12064
12065
12066
12067
12068
12069
12070
12071
12072
12073
12074
12075
12076
12077
12078
12079
12080
12081
12082
12083
12084
12085
12086
12087
12088
12089
12090
12091
12092
12093
12094
12095
12096
12097
12098
12099
12100
12101
12102
12103
12104
12105
12106
12107
12108
12109
12110
12111
12112
12113
12114
12115
12116
12117
12118
12119
12120
12121
12122
12123
12124
12125
12126
12127
12128
12129
12130
12131
12132
12133
12134
12135
12136
12137
12138
12139
12140
12141
12142
12143
12144
12145
12146
12147
12148
12149
12150
12151
12152
12153
12154
12155
12156
12157
12158
12159
12160
12161
12162
12163
12164
12165
12166
12167
12168
12169
12170
12171
12172
12173
12174
12175
12176
12177
12178
12179
12180
12181
12182
12183
12184
12185
12186
12187
12188
12189
12190
12191
12192
12193
12194
12195
12196
12197
12198
12199
12200
12201
12202
12203
12204
12205
12206
12207
12208
12209
12210
12211
12212
12213
12214
12215
12216
12217
12218
12219
12220
12221
12222
12223
12224
12225
12226
12227
12228
12229
12230
12231
12232
12233
12234
12235
12236
12237
12238
12239
12240
12241
12242
12243
12244
12245
12246
12247
12248
12249
12250
12251
12252
12253
12254
12255
12256
12257
12258
12259
12260
12261
12262
12263
12264
12265
12266
12267
12268
12269
12270
12271
12272
12273
12274
12275
12276
12277
12278
12279
12280
12281
12282
12283
12284
12285
12286
12287
12288
12289
12290
12291
12292
12293
12294
12295
12296
12297
12298
12299
12300
12301
12302
12303
12304
12305
12306
12307
12308
12309
12310
12311
12312
12313
12314
12315
12316
12317
12318
12319
12320
12321
12322
12323
12324
12325
12326
12327
12328
12329
12330
12331
12332
12333
12334
12335
12336
12337
12338
12339
12340
12341
12342
12343
12344
12345
12346
12347
12348
12349
12350
12351
12352
12353
12354
12355
12356
12357
12358
12359
12360
12361
12362
12363
12364
12365
12366
12367
12368
12369
12370
12371
12372
12373
12374
12375
12376
12377
12378
12379
12380
12381
12382
12383
12384
12385
12386
12387
12388
12389
12390
12391
12392
12393
12394
12395
12396
12397
12398
12399
12400
12401
12402
12403
12404
12405
12406
12407
12408
12409
12410
12411
12412
12413
12414
12415
12416
12417
12418
12419
12420
12421
12422
12423
12424
12425
12426
12427
12428
12429
12430
12431
12432
12433
12434
12435
12436
12437
12438
12439
12440
12441
12442
12443
12444
12445
12446
12447
12448
12449
12450
12451
12452
12453
12454
12455
12456
12457
12458
12459
12460
12461
12462
12463
12464
12465
12466
12467
12468
12469
12470
12471
12472
12473
12474
12475
12476
12477
12478
12479
12480
12481
12482
12483
12484
12485
12486
12487
12488
12489
12490
12491
12492
12493
12494
12495
12496
12497
12498
12499
12500
12501
12502
12503
12504
12505
12506
12507
12508
12509
12510
12511
12512
12513
12514
12515
12516
12517
12518
12519
12520
12521
12522
12523
12524
12525
12526
12527
12528
12529
12530
12531
12532
12533
12534
12535
12536
12537
12538
12539
12540
12541
12542
12543
12544
12545
12546
12547
12548
12549
12550
12551
12552
12553
12554
12555
12556
12557
12558
12559
12560
12561
12562
12563
12564
12565
12566
12567
12568
12569
12570
12571
12572
12573
12574
12575
12576
12577
12578
12579
12580
12581
12582
12583
12584
12585
12586
12587
12588
12589
12590
12591
12592
12593
12594
12595
12596
12597
12598
12599
12600
12601
12602
12603
12604
12605
12606
12607
12608
12609
12610
12611
12612
12613
12614
12615
12616
12617
12618
12619
12620
12621
12622
12623
12624
12625
12626
12627
12628
12629
12630
12631
12632
12633
12634
12635
12636
12637
12638
12639
12640
12641
12642
12643
12644
12645
12646
12647
12648
12649
12650
12651
12652
12653
12654
12655
12656
12657
12658
12659
12660
12661
12662
12663
12664
12665
12666
12667
12668
12669
12670
12671
12672
12673
12674
12675
12676
12677
12678
12679
12680
12681
12682
12683
12684
12685
12686
12687
12688
12689
12690
12691
12692
12693
12694
12695
12696
12697
12698
12699
12700
12701
12702
12703
12704
12705
12706
12707
12708
12709
12710
12711
12712
12713
12714
12715
12716
12717
12718
12719
12720
12721
12722
12723
12724
12725
12726
12727
12728
12729
12730
12731
12732
12733
12734
12735
12736
12737
12738
12739
12740
12741
12742
12743
12744
12745
12746
12747
12748
12749
12750
12751
12752
12753
12754
12755
12756
12757
12758
12759
12760
12761
12762
12763
12764
12765
12766
12767
12768
12769
12770
12771
12772
12773
12774
12775
12776
12777
12778
12779
12780
12781
12782
12783
12784
12785
12786
12787
12788
12789
12790
12791
12792
12793
12794
12795
12796
12797
12798
12799
12800
12801
12802
12803
12804
12805
12806
12807
12808
12809
12810
12811
12812
12813
12814
12815
12816
12817
12818
12819
12820
12821
12822
12823
12824
12825
12826
12827
12828
12829
12830
12831
12832
12833
12834
12835
12836
12837
12838
12839
12840
12841
12842
12843
12844
12845
12846
12847
12848
12849
12850
12851
12852
12853
12854
12855
12856
12857
12858
12859
12860
12861
12862
12863
12864
12865
12866
12867
12868
12869
12870
12871
12872
12873
12874
12875
12876
12877
12878
12879
12880
12881
12882
12883
12884
12885
12886
12887
12888
12889
12890
12891
12892
12893
12894
12895
12896
12897
12898
12899
12900
12901
12902
12903
12904
12905
12906
12907
12908
12909
12910
12911
12912
12913
12914
12915
12916
12917
12918
12919
12920
12921
12922
12923
12924
12925
12926
12927
12928
12929
12930
12931
12932
12933
12934
12935
12936
12937
12938
12939
12940
12941
12942
12943
12944
12945
12946
12947
12948
12949
12950
12951
12952
12953
12954
12955
12956
12957
12958
12959
12960
12961
12962
12963
12964
12965
12966
12967
12968
12969
12970
12971
12972
12973
12974
12975
12976
12977
12978
12979
12980
12981
12982
12983
12984
12985
12986
12987
12988
12989
12990
12991
12992
12993
12994
12995
12996
12997
12998
12999
13000
13001
13002
13003
13004
13005
13006
13007
13008
13009
13010
13011
13012
13013
13014
13015
13016
13017
13018
13019
13020
13021
13022
13023
13024
13025
13026
13027
13028
13029
13030
13031
13032
13033
13034
13035
13036
13037
13038
13039
13040
13041
13042
13043
13044
13045
13046
13047
13048
13049
13050
13051
13052
13053
13054
13055
13056
13057
13058
13059
13060
13061
13062
13063
13064
13065
13066
13067
13068
13069
13070
13071
13072
13073
13074
13075
13076
13077
13078
13079
13080
13081
13082
13083
13084
13085
13086
13087
13088
13089
13090
13091
13092
13093
13094
13095
13096
13097
13098
13099
13100
13101
13102
13103
13104
13105
13106
13107
13108
13109
13110
13111
13112
13113
13114
13115
13116
13117
13118
13119
13120
13121
13122
13123
13124
13125
13126
13127
13128
13129
13130
13131
13132
13133
13134
13135
13136
13137
13138
13139
13140
13141
13142
13143
13144
13145
13146
13147
13148
13149
13150
13151
13152
13153
13154
13155
13156
13157
13158
13159
13160
13161
13162
13163
13164
13165
13166
13167
13168
13169
13170
13171
13172
13173
13174
13175
13176
13177
13178
13179
13180
13181
13182
13183
13184
13185
13186
13187
13188
13189
13190
13191
13192
13193
13194
13195
13196
13197
13198
13199
13200
13201
13202
13203
13204
13205
13206
13207
13208
13209
13210
13211
13212
13213
13214
13215
13216
13217
13218
13219
13220
13221
13222
13223
13224
13225
13226
13227
13228
13229
13230
13231
13232
13233
13234
13235
13236
13237
13238
13239
13240
13241
13242
13243
13244
13245
13246
13247
13248
13249
13250
13251
13252
13253
13254
13255
13256
13257
13258
13259
13260
13261
13262
13263
13264
13265
13266
13267
13268
13269
13270
13271
13272
13273
13274
13275
13276
13277
13278
13279
13280
13281
13282
13283
13284
13285
13286
13287
13288
13289
13290
13291
13292
13293
13294
13295
13296
13297
13298
13299
13300
13301
13302
13303
13304
13305
13306
13307
13308
13309
13310
13311
13312
13313
13314
13315
13316
13317
13318
13319
13320
13321
13322
13323
13324
13325
13326
13327
13328
13329
13330
13331
13332
13333
13334
13335
13336
13337
13338
13339
13340
13341
13342
13343
13344
13345
13346
13347
13348
13349
13350
13351
13352
13353
13354
13355
13356
13357
13358
13359
13360
13361
13362
13363
13364
13365
13366
13367
13368
13369
13370
13371
13372
13373
13374
13375
13376
13377
13378
13379
13380
13381
13382
13383
13384
13385
13386
13387
13388
13389
13390
13391
13392
13393
13394
13395
13396
13397
13398
13399
13400
13401
13402
13403
13404
13405
13406
13407
13408
13409
13410
13411
13412
13413
13414
13415
13416
13417
13418
13419
13420
13421
13422
13423
13424
13425
13426
13427
13428
13429
13430
13431
13432
13433
13434
13435
13436
13437
13438
13439
13440
13441
13442
13443
13444
13445
13446
13447
13448
13449
13450
13451
13452
13453
13454
13455
13456
13457
13458
13459
13460
13461
13462
13463
13464
13465
13466
13467
13468
13469
13470
13471
13472
13473
13474
13475
13476
13477
13478
13479
13480
13481
13482
13483
13484
13485
13486
13487
13488
13489
13490
13491
13492
13493
13494
13495
13496
13497
13498
13499
13500
13501
13502
13503
13504
13505
13506
13507
13508
13509
13510
13511
13512
13513
13514
13515
13516
13517
13518
13519
13520
13521
13522
13523
13524
13525
13526
13527
13528
13529
13530
13531
13532
13533
13534
13535
13536
13537
13538
13539
13540
13541
13542
13543
13544
13545
13546
13547
13548
13549
13550
13551
13552
13553
13554
13555
13556
13557
13558
13559
13560
13561
13562
13563
13564
13565
13566
13567
13568
13569
13570
13571
13572
13573
13574
13575
13576
13577
13578
13579
13580
13581
13582
13583
13584
13585
13586
13587
13588
13589
13590
13591
13592
13593
13594
13595
13596
13597
13598
13599
13600
13601
13602
13603
13604
13605
13606
13607
13608
13609
13610
13611
13612
13613
13614
13615
13616
13617
13618
13619
13620
13621
13622
13623
13624
13625
13626
13627
13628
13629
13630
13631
13632
13633
13634
13635
13636
13637
13638
13639
13640
13641
13642
13643
13644
13645
13646
13647
13648
13649
13650
13651
13652
13653
13654
13655
13656
13657
13658
13659
13660
13661
13662
13663
13664
13665
13666
13667
13668
13669
13670
13671
13672
13673
13674
13675
13676
13677
13678
13679
13680
13681
13682
13683
13684
13685
13686
13687
13688
13689
13690
13691
13692
13693
13694
13695
13696
13697
13698
13699
13700
13701
13702
13703
13704
13705
13706
13707
13708
13709
13710
13711
13712
13713
13714
13715
13716
13717
13718
13719
13720
13721
13722
13723
13724
13725
13726
13727
13728
13729
13730
13731
13732
13733
13734
13735
13736
13737
13738
13739
13740
13741
13742
13743
13744
13745
13746
13747
13748
13749
13750
13751
13752
13753
13754
13755
13756
13757
13758
13759
13760
13761
13762
13763
13764
13765
13766
13767
13768
13769
13770
13771
13772
13773
13774
13775
13776
13777
13778
13779
13780
13781
13782
13783
13784
13785
13786
13787
13788
13789
13790
13791
13792
13793
13794
13795
13796
13797
13798
13799
13800
13801
13802
13803
13804
13805
13806
13807
13808
13809
13810
13811
13812
13813
13814
13815
13816
13817
13818
13819
13820
13821
13822
13823
13824
13825
13826
13827
13828
13829
13830
13831
13832
13833
13834
13835
13836
13837
13838
13839
13840
13841
13842
13843
13844
13845
13846
13847
13848
13849
13850
13851
13852
13853
13854
13855
13856
13857
13858
13859
13860
13861
13862
13863
13864
13865
13866
13867
13868
13869
13870
13871
13872
13873
13874
13875
13876
13877
13878
13879
13880
13881
13882
13883
13884
13885
13886
13887
13888
13889
13890
13891
13892
13893
13894
13895
13896
13897
13898
13899
13900
13901
13902
13903
13904
13905
13906
13907
13908
13909
13910
13911
13912
13913
13914
13915
13916
13917
13918
13919
13920
13921
13922
13923
13924
13925
13926
13927
13928
13929
13930
13931
13932
13933
13934
13935
13936
13937
13938
13939
13940
13941
13942
13943
13944
13945
13946
13947
13948
13949
13950
13951
13952
13953
13954
13955
13956
13957
13958
13959
13960
13961
13962
13963
13964
13965
13966
13967
13968
13969
13970
13971
13972
13973
13974
13975
13976
13977
13978
13979
13980
13981
13982
13983
13984
13985
13986
13987
13988
13989
13990
13991
13992
13993
13994
13995
13996
13997
13998
13999
14000
14001
14002
14003
14004
14005
14006
14007
14008
14009
14010
14011
14012
14013
14014
14015
14016
14017
14018
14019
14020
14021
14022
14023
14024
14025
14026
14027
14028
14029
14030
14031
14032
14033
14034
14035
14036
14037
14038
14039
14040
14041
14042
14043
14044
14045
14046
14047
14048
14049
14050
14051
14052
14053
14054
14055
14056
14057
14058
14059
14060
14061
14062
14063
14064
14065
14066
14067
14068
14069
14070
14071
14072
14073
14074
14075
14076
14077
14078
14079
14080
14081
14082
14083
14084
14085
14086
14087
14088
14089
14090
14091
14092
14093
14094
14095
14096
14097
14098
14099
14100
14101
14102
14103
14104
14105
14106
14107
14108
14109
14110
14111
14112
14113
14114
14115
14116
14117
14118
14119
14120
14121
14122
14123
14124
14125
14126
14127
14128
14129
14130
14131
14132
14133
14134
14135
14136
14137
14138
14139
14140
14141
14142
14143
14144
14145
14146
14147
14148
14149
14150
14151
14152
14153
14154
14155
14156
14157
14158
14159
14160
14161
14162
14163
14164
14165
14166
14167
14168
14169
14170
14171
14172
14173
14174
14175
14176
14177
14178
14179
14180
14181
14182
14183
14184
14185
14186
14187
14188
14189
14190
14191
14192
14193
14194
14195
14196
14197
14198
14199
14200
14201
14202
14203
14204
14205
14206
14207
14208
14209
14210
14211
14212
14213
14214
14215
14216
14217
14218
14219
14220
14221
14222
14223
14224
14225
14226
14227
14228
14229
14230
14231
14232
14233
14234
14235
14236
14237
14238
14239
14240
14241
14242
14243
14244
14245
14246
14247
14248
14249
14250
14251
14252
14253
14254
14255
14256
14257
14258
14259
14260
14261
14262
14263
14264
14265
14266
14267
14268
14269
14270
14271
14272
14273
14274
14275
14276
14277
14278
14279
14280
14281
14282
14283
14284
14285
14286
14287
14288
14289
14290
14291
14292
14293
14294
14295
14296
14297
14298
14299
14300
14301
14302
14303
14304
14305
14306
14307
14308
14309
14310
14311
14312
14313
14314
14315
14316
14317
14318
14319
14320
14321
14322
14323
14324
14325
14326
14327
14328
14329
14330
14331
14332
14333
14334
14335
14336
14337
14338
14339
14340
14341
14342
14343
14344
14345
14346
14347
14348
14349
14350
14351
14352
14353
14354
14355
14356
14357
14358
14359
14360
14361
14362
14363
14364
14365
14366
14367
14368
14369
14370
14371
14372
14373
14374
14375
14376
14377
14378
14379
14380
14381
14382
14383
14384
14385
14386
14387
14388
14389
14390
14391
14392
14393
14394
14395
14396
14397
14398
14399
14400
14401
14402
14403
14404
14405
14406
14407
14408
14409
14410
14411
14412
14413
14414
14415
14416
14417
14418
14419
14420
14421
14422
14423
14424
14425
14426
14427
14428
14429
14430
14431
14432
14433
14434
14435
14436
14437
14438
14439
14440
14441
14442
14443
14444
14445
14446
14447
14448
14449
14450
14451
14452
14453
14454
14455
14456
14457
14458
14459
14460
14461
14462
14463
14464
14465
14466
14467
14468
14469
14470
14471
14472
14473
14474
14475
14476
14477
14478
14479
14480
14481
14482
14483
14484
14485
14486
14487
14488
14489
14490
14491
14492
14493
14494
14495
14496
14497
14498
14499
14500
14501
14502
14503
14504
14505
14506
14507
14508
14509
14510
14511
14512
14513
14514
14515
14516
14517
14518
14519
14520
14521
14522
14523
14524
14525
14526
14527
14528
14529
14530
14531
14532
14533
14534
14535
14536
14537
14538
14539
14540
14541
14542
14543
14544
14545
14546
14547
14548
14549
14550
14551
14552
14553
14554
14555
14556
14557
14558
14559
14560
14561
14562
14563
14564
14565
14566
14567
14568
14569
14570
14571
14572
14573
14574
14575
14576
14577
14578
14579
14580
14581
14582
14583
14584
14585
14586
14587
14588
14589
14590
14591
14592
14593
14594
14595
14596
14597
14598
14599
14600
14601
14602
14603
14604
14605
14606
14607
14608
14609
14610
14611
14612
14613
14614
14615
14616
14617
14618
14619
14620
14621
14622
14623
14624
14625
14626
14627
14628
14629
14630
14631
14632
14633
14634
14635
14636
14637
14638
14639
14640
14641
14642
14643
14644
14645
14646
14647
14648
14649
14650
14651
14652
14653
14654
14655
14656
14657
14658
14659
14660
14661
14662
14663
14664
14665
14666
14667
14668
14669
14670
14671
14672
14673
14674
14675
14676
14677
14678
14679
14680
14681
14682
14683
14684
14685
14686
14687
14688
14689
14690
14691
14692
14693
14694
14695
14696
14697
14698
14699
14700
14701
14702
14703
14704
14705
14706
14707
14708
14709
14710
14711
14712
14713
14714
14715
14716
14717
14718
14719
14720
14721
14722
14723
14724
14725
14726
14727
14728
14729
14730
14731
14732
14733
14734
14735
14736
14737
14738
14739
14740
14741
14742
14743
14744
14745
14746
14747
14748
14749
14750
14751
14752
14753
14754
14755
14756
14757
14758
14759
14760
14761
14762
14763
14764
14765
14766
14767
14768
14769
14770
14771
14772
14773
14774
14775
14776
14777
14778
14779
14780
14781
14782
14783
14784
14785
14786
14787
14788
14789
14790
14791
14792
14793
14794
14795
14796
14797
14798
14799
14800
14801
14802
14803
14804
14805
14806
14807
14808
14809
14810
14811
14812
14813
14814
14815
14816
14817
14818
14819
14820
14821
14822
14823
14824
14825
14826
14827
14828
14829
14830
14831
14832
14833
14834
14835
14836
14837
14838
14839
14840
14841
14842
14843
14844
14845
14846
14847
14848
14849
14850
14851
14852
14853
14854
14855
14856
14857
14858
14859
14860
14861
14862
14863
14864
14865
14866
14867
14868
14869
14870
14871
14872
14873
14874
14875
14876
14877
14878
14879
14880
14881
14882
14883
14884
14885
14886
14887
14888
14889
14890
14891
14892
14893
14894
14895
14896
14897
14898
14899
14900
14901
14902
14903
14904
14905
14906
14907
14908
14909
14910
14911
14912
14913
14914
14915
14916
14917
14918
14919
14920
14921
14922
14923
14924
14925
14926
14927
14928
14929
14930
14931
14932
14933
14934
14935
14936
14937
14938
14939
14940
14941
14942
14943
14944
14945
14946
14947
14948
14949
14950
14951
14952
14953
14954
14955
14956
14957
14958
14959
14960
14961
14962
14963
14964
14965
14966
14967
14968
14969
14970
14971
14972
14973
14974
14975
14976
14977
14978
14979
14980
14981
14982
14983
14984
14985
14986
14987
14988
14989
14990
14991
14992
14993
14994
14995
14996
14997
14998
14999
15000
15001
15002
15003
15004
15005
15006
15007
15008
15009
15010
15011
15012
15013
15014
15015
15016
15017
15018
15019
15020
15021
15022
15023
15024
15025
15026
15027
15028
15029
15030
15031
15032
15033
15034
15035
15036
15037
15038
15039
15040
15041
15042
15043
15044
15045
15046
15047
15048
15049
15050
15051
15052
15053
15054
15055
15056
15057
15058
15059
15060
15061
15062
15063
15064
15065
15066
15067
15068
15069
15070
15071
15072
15073
15074
15075
15076
15077
15078
15079
15080
15081
15082
15083
15084
15085
15086
15087
15088
15089
15090
15091
15092
15093
15094
15095
15096
15097
15098
15099
15100
15101
15102
15103
15104
15105
15106
15107
15108
15109
15110
15111
15112
15113
15114
15115
15116
15117
15118
15119
15120
15121
15122
15123
15124
15125
15126
15127
15128
15129
15130
15131
15132
15133
15134
15135
15136
15137
15138
15139
15140
15141
15142
15143
15144
15145
15146
15147
15148
15149
15150
15151
15152
15153
15154
15155
15156
15157
15158
15159
15160
15161
15162
15163
15164
15165
15166
15167
15168
15169
15170
15171
15172
15173
15174
15175
15176
15177
15178
15179
15180
15181
15182
15183
15184
15185
15186
15187
15188
15189
15190
15191
15192
15193
15194
15195
15196
15197
15198
15199
15200
15201
15202
15203
15204
15205
15206
15207
15208
15209
15210
15211
15212
15213
15214
15215
15216
15217
15218
15219
15220
15221
15222
15223
15224
15225
15226
15227
15228
15229
15230
15231
15232
15233
15234
15235
15236
15237
15238
15239
15240
15241
15242
15243
15244
15245
15246
15247
15248
15249
15250
15251
15252
15253
15254
15255
15256
15257
15258
15259
15260
15261
15262
15263
15264
15265
15266
15267
15268
15269
15270
15271
15272
15273
15274
15275
15276
15277
15278
15279
15280
15281
15282
15283
15284
15285
15286
15287
15288
15289
15290
15291
15292
15293
15294
15295
15296
15297
15298
15299
15300
15301
15302
15303
15304
15305
15306
15307
15308
15309
15310
15311
15312
15313
15314
15315
15316
15317
15318
15319
15320
15321
15322
15323
15324
15325
15326
15327
15328
15329
15330
15331
15332
15333
15334
15335
15336
15337
15338
15339
15340
15341
15342
15343
15344
15345
15346
15347
15348
15349
15350
15351
15352
15353
15354
15355
15356
15357
15358
15359
15360
15361
15362
15363
15364
15365
15366
15367
15368
15369
15370
15371
15372
15373
15374
15375
15376
15377
15378
15379
15380
15381
15382
15383
15384
15385
15386
15387
15388
15389
15390
15391
15392
15393
15394
15395
15396
15397
15398
15399
15400
15401
15402
15403
15404
15405
15406
15407
15408
15409
15410
15411
15412
15413
15414
15415
15416
15417
15418
15419
15420
15421
15422
15423
15424
15425
15426
15427
15428
15429
15430
15431
15432
15433
15434
15435
15436
15437
15438
15439
15440
15441
15442
15443
15444
15445
15446
15447
15448
15449
15450
15451
15452
15453
15454
15455
15456
15457
15458
15459
15460
15461
15462
15463
15464
15465
15466
15467
15468
15469
15470
15471
15472
15473
15474
15475
15476
15477
15478
15479
15480
15481
15482
15483
15484
15485
15486
15487
15488
15489
15490
15491
15492
15493
15494
15495
15496
15497
15498
15499
15500
15501
15502
15503
15504
15505
15506
15507
15508
15509
15510
15511
15512
15513
15514
15515
15516
15517
15518
15519
15520
15521
15522
15523
15524
15525
15526
15527
15528
15529
15530
15531
15532
15533
15534
15535
15536
15537
15538
15539
15540
15541
15542
15543
15544
15545
15546
15547
15548
15549
15550
15551
15552
15553
15554
15555
15556
15557
15558
15559
15560
15561
15562
15563
15564
15565
15566
15567
15568
15569
15570
15571
15572
15573
15574
15575
15576
15577
15578
15579
15580
15581
15582
15583
15584
15585
15586
15587
15588
15589
15590
15591
15592
15593
15594
15595
15596
15597
15598
15599
15600
15601
15602
15603
15604
15605
15606
15607
15608
15609
15610
15611
15612
15613
15614
15615
15616
15617
15618
15619
15620
15621
15622
15623
15624
15625
15626
15627
15628
15629
15630
15631
15632
15633
15634
15635
15636
15637
15638
15639
15640
15641
15642
15643
15644
15645
15646
15647
15648
15649
15650
15651
15652
15653
15654
15655
15656
15657
15658
15659
15660
15661
15662
15663
15664
15665
15666
15667
15668
15669
15670
15671
15672
15673
15674
15675
15676
15677
15678
15679
15680
15681
15682
15683
15684
15685
15686
15687
15688
15689
15690
15691
15692
15693
15694
15695
15696
15697
15698
15699
15700
15701
15702
15703
15704
15705
15706
15707
15708
15709
15710
15711
15712
15713
15714
15715
15716
15717
15718
15719
15720
15721
15722
15723
15724
15725
15726
15727
15728
15729
15730
15731
15732
15733
15734
15735
15736
15737
15738
15739
15740
15741
15742
15743
15744
15745
15746
15747
15748
15749
15750
15751
15752
15753
15754
15755
15756
15757
15758
15759
15760
15761
15762
15763
15764
15765
15766
15767
15768
15769
15770
15771
15772
15773
15774
15775
15776
15777
15778
15779
15780
15781
15782
15783
15784
15785
15786
15787
15788
15789
15790
15791
15792
15793
15794
15795
15796
15797
15798
15799
15800
15801
15802
15803
15804
15805
15806
15807
15808
15809
15810
15811
15812
15813
15814
15815
15816
15817
15818
15819
15820
15821
15822
15823
15824
15825
15826
15827
15828
15829
15830
15831
15832
15833
15834
15835
15836
15837
15838
15839
15840
15841
15842
15843
15844
15845
15846
15847
15848
15849
15850
15851
15852
15853
15854
15855
15856
15857
15858
15859
15860
15861
15862
15863
15864
15865
15866
15867
15868
15869
15870
15871
15872
15873
15874
15875
15876
15877
15878
15879
15880
15881
15882
15883
15884
15885
15886
15887
15888
15889
15890
15891
15892
15893
15894
15895
15896
15897
15898
15899
15900
15901
15902
15903
15904
15905
15906
15907
15908
15909
15910
15911
15912
15913
15914
15915
15916
15917
15918
15919
15920
15921
15922
15923
15924
15925
15926
15927
15928
15929
15930
15931
15932
15933
15934
15935
15936
15937
15938
15939
15940
15941
15942
15943
15944
15945
15946
15947
15948
15949
15950
15951
15952
15953
15954
15955
15956
15957
15958
15959
15960
15961
15962
15963
15964
15965
15966
15967
15968
15969
15970
15971
15972
15973
15974
15975
15976
15977
15978
15979
15980
15981
15982
15983
15984
15985
15986
15987
15988
15989
15990
15991
15992
15993
15994
15995
15996
15997
15998
15999
16000
16001
16002
16003
16004
16005
16006
16007
16008
16009
16010
16011
16012
16013
16014
16015
16016
16017
16018
16019
16020
16021
16022
16023
16024
16025
16026
16027
16028
16029
16030
16031
16032
16033
16034
16035
16036
16037
16038
16039
16040
16041
16042
16043
16044
16045
16046
16047
16048
16049
16050
16051
16052
16053
16054
16055
16056
16057
16058
16059
16060
16061
16062
16063
16064
16065
16066
16067
16068
16069
16070
16071
16072
16073
16074
16075
16076
16077
16078
16079
16080
16081
16082
16083
16084
16085
16086
16087
16088
16089
16090
16091
16092
16093
16094
16095
16096
16097
16098
16099
16100
16101
16102
16103
16104
16105
16106
16107
16108
16109
16110
16111
16112
16113
16114
16115
16116
16117
16118
16119
16120
16121
16122
16123
16124
16125
16126
16127
16128
16129
16130
16131
16132
16133
16134
16135
16136
16137
16138
16139
16140
16141
16142
16143
16144
16145
16146
16147
16148
16149
16150
16151
16152
16153
16154
16155
16156
16157
16158
16159
16160
16161
16162
16163
16164
16165
16166
16167
16168
16169
16170
16171
16172
16173
16174
16175
16176
16177
16178
16179
16180
16181
16182
16183
16184
16185
16186
16187
16188
16189
16190
16191
16192
16193
16194
16195
16196
16197
16198
16199
16200
16201
16202
16203
16204
16205
16206
16207
16208
16209
16210
16211
16212
16213
16214
16215
16216
16217
16218
16219
16220
16221
16222
16223
16224
16225
16226
16227
16228
16229
16230
16231
16232
16233
16234
16235
16236
16237
16238
16239
16240
16241
16242
16243
16244
16245
16246
16247
16248
16249
16250
16251
16252
16253
16254
16255
16256
16257
16258
16259
16260
16261
16262
16263
16264
16265
16266
16267
16268
16269
16270
16271
16272
16273
16274
16275
16276
16277
16278
16279
16280
16281
16282
16283
16284
16285
16286
16287
16288
16289
16290
16291
16292
16293
16294
16295
16296
16297
16298
16299
16300
16301
16302
16303
16304
16305
16306
16307
16308
16309
16310
16311
16312
16313
16314
16315
16316
16317
16318
16319
16320
16321
16322
16323
16324
16325
16326
16327
16328
16329
16330
16331
16332
16333
16334
16335
16336
16337
16338
16339
16340
16341
16342
16343
16344
16345
16346
16347
16348
16349
16350
16351
16352
16353
16354
16355
16356
16357
16358
16359
16360
16361
16362
16363
16364
16365
16366
16367
16368
16369
16370
16371
16372
16373
16374
16375
16376
16377
16378
16379
16380
16381
16382
16383
16384
16385
16386
16387
16388
16389
16390
16391
16392
16393
16394
16395
16396
16397
16398
16399
16400
16401
16402
16403
16404
16405
16406
16407
16408
16409
16410
16411
16412
16413
16414
16415
16416
16417
16418
16419
16420
16421
16422
16423
16424
16425
16426
16427
16428
16429
16430
16431
16432
16433
16434
16435
16436
16437
16438
16439
16440
16441
16442
16443
16444
16445
16446
16447
16448
16449
16450
16451
16452
16453
16454
16455
16456
16457
16458
16459
16460
16461
16462
16463
16464
16465
16466
16467
16468
16469
16470
16471
16472
16473
16474
16475
16476
16477
16478
16479
16480
16481
16482
16483
16484
16485
16486
16487
16488
16489
16490
16491
16492
16493
16494
16495
16496
16497
16498
16499
16500
16501
16502
16503
16504
16505
16506
16507
16508
16509
16510
16511
16512
16513
16514
16515
16516
16517
16518
16519
16520
16521
16522
16523
16524
16525
16526
16527
16528
16529
16530
16531
16532
16533
16534
16535
16536
16537
16538
16539
16540
16541
16542
16543
16544
16545
16546
16547
16548
16549
16550
16551
16552
16553
16554
16555
16556
16557
16558
16559
16560
16561
16562
16563
16564
16565
16566
16567
16568
16569
16570
16571
16572
16573
16574
16575
16576
16577
16578
16579
16580
16581
16582
16583
16584
16585
16586
16587
16588
16589
16590
16591
16592
16593
16594
16595
16596
16597
16598
16599
16600
16601
16602
16603
16604
16605
16606
16607
16608
16609
16610
16611
16612
16613
16614
16615
16616
16617
16618
16619
16620
16621
16622
16623
16624
16625
16626
16627
16628
16629
16630
16631
16632
16633
16634
16635
16636
16637
16638
16639
16640
16641
16642
16643
16644
16645
16646
16647
16648
16649
16650
16651
16652
16653
16654
16655
16656
16657
16658
16659
16660
16661
16662
16663
16664
16665
16666
16667
16668
16669
16670
16671
16672
16673
16674
16675
16676
16677
16678
16679
16680
16681
16682
16683
16684
16685
16686
16687
16688
16689
16690
16691
16692
16693
16694
16695
16696
16697
16698
16699
16700
16701
16702
16703
16704
16705
16706
16707
16708
16709
16710
16711
16712
16713
16714
16715
16716
16717
16718
16719
16720
16721
16722
16723
16724
16725
16726
16727
16728
16729
16730
16731
16732
16733
16734
16735
16736
16737
16738
16739
16740
16741
16742
16743
16744
16745
16746
16747
16748
16749
16750
16751
16752
16753
16754
16755
16756
16757
16758
16759
16760
16761
16762
16763
16764
16765
16766
16767
16768
16769
16770
16771
16772
16773
16774
16775
16776
16777
16778
16779
16780
16781
16782
16783
16784
16785
16786
16787
16788
16789
16790
16791
16792
16793
16794
16795
16796
16797
16798
16799
16800
16801
16802
16803
16804
16805
16806
16807
16808
16809
16810
16811
16812
16813
16814
16815
16816
16817
16818
16819
16820
16821
16822
16823
16824
16825
16826
16827
16828
16829
16830
16831
16832
16833
16834
16835
16836
16837
16838
16839
16840
16841
16842
16843
16844
16845
16846
16847
16848
16849
16850
16851
16852
16853
16854
16855
16856
16857
16858
16859
16860
16861
16862
16863
16864
16865
16866
16867
16868
16869
16870
16871
16872
16873
16874
16875
16876
16877
16878
16879
16880
16881
16882
16883
16884
16885
16886
16887
16888
16889
16890
16891
16892
16893
16894
16895
16896
16897
16898
16899
16900
16901
16902
16903
16904
16905
16906
16907
16908
16909
16910
16911
16912
16913
16914
16915
16916
16917
16918
16919
16920
16921
16922
16923
16924
16925
16926
16927
16928
16929
16930
16931
16932
16933
16934
16935
16936
16937
16938
16939
16940
16941
16942
16943
16944
16945
16946
16947
16948
16949
16950
16951
16952
16953
16954
16955
16956
16957
16958
16959
16960
16961
16962
16963
16964
16965
16966
16967
16968
16969
16970
16971
16972
16973
16974
16975
16976
16977
16978
16979
16980
16981
16982
16983
16984
16985
16986
16987
16988
16989
16990
16991
16992
16993
16994
16995
16996
16997
16998
16999
17000
17001
17002
17003
17004
17005
17006
17007
17008
17009
17010
17011
17012
17013
17014
17015
17016
17017
17018
17019
17020
17021
17022
17023
17024
17025
17026
17027
17028
17029
17030
17031
17032
17033
17034
17035
17036
17037
17038
17039
17040
17041
17042
17043
17044
17045
17046
17047
17048
17049
17050
17051
17052
17053
17054
17055
17056
17057
17058
17059
17060
17061
17062
17063
17064
17065
17066
17067
17068
17069
17070
17071
17072
17073
17074
17075
17076
17077
17078
17079
17080
17081
17082
17083
17084
17085
17086
17087
17088
17089
17090
17091
17092
17093
17094
17095
17096
17097
17098
17099
17100
17101
17102
17103
17104
17105
17106
17107
17108
17109
17110
17111
17112
17113
17114
17115
17116
17117
17118
17119
17120
17121
17122
17123
17124
17125
17126
17127
17128
17129
17130
17131
17132
17133
17134
17135
17136
17137
17138
17139
17140
17141
17142
17143
17144
17145
17146
17147
17148
17149
17150
17151
17152
17153
17154
17155
17156
17157
17158
17159
17160
17161
17162
17163
17164
17165
17166
17167
17168
17169
17170
17171
17172
17173
17174
17175
17176
17177
17178
17179
17180
17181
17182
17183
17184
17185
17186
17187
17188
17189
17190
17191
17192
17193
17194
17195
17196
17197
17198
17199
17200
17201
17202
17203
17204
17205
17206
17207
17208
17209
17210
17211
17212
17213
17214
17215
17216
17217
17218
17219
17220
17221
17222
17223
17224
17225
17226
17227
17228
17229
17230
17231
17232
17233
17234
17235
17236
17237
17238
17239
17240
17241
17242
17243
17244
17245
17246
17247
17248
17249
17250
17251
17252
17253
17254
17255
17256
17257
17258
17259
17260
17261
17262
17263
17264
17265
17266
17267
17268
17269
17270
17271
17272
17273
17274
17275
17276
17277
17278
17279
17280
17281
17282
17283
17284
17285
17286
17287
17288
17289
17290
17291
17292
17293
17294
17295
17296
17297
17298
17299
17300
17301
17302
17303
17304
17305
17306
17307
17308
17309
17310
17311
17312
17313
17314
17315
17316
17317
17318
17319
17320
17321
17322
17323
17324
17325
17326
17327
17328
17329
17330
17331
17332
17333
17334
17335
17336
17337
17338
17339
17340
17341
17342
17343
17344
17345
17346
17347
17348
17349
17350
17351
17352
17353
17354
17355
17356
17357
17358
17359
17360
17361
17362
17363
17364
17365
17366
17367
17368
17369
17370
17371
17372
17373
17374
17375
17376
17377
17378
17379
17380
17381
17382
17383
17384
17385
17386
17387
17388
17389
17390
17391
17392
17393
17394
17395
17396
17397
17398
17399
17400
17401
17402
17403
17404
17405
17406
17407
17408
17409
17410
17411
17412
17413
17414
17415
17416
17417
17418
17419
17420
17421
17422
17423
17424
17425
17426
17427
17428
17429
17430
17431
17432
17433
17434
17435
17436
17437
17438
17439
17440
17441
17442
17443
17444
17445
17446
17447
17448
17449
17450
17451
17452
17453
17454
17455
17456
17457
17458
17459
17460
17461
17462
17463
17464
17465
17466
17467
17468
17469
17470
17471
17472
17473
17474
17475
17476
17477
17478
17479
17480
17481
17482
17483
17484
17485
17486
17487
17488
17489
17490
17491
17492
17493
17494
17495
17496
17497
17498
17499
17500
17501
17502
17503
17504
17505
17506
17507
17508
17509
17510
17511
17512
17513
17514
17515
17516
17517
17518
17519
17520
17521
17522
17523
17524
17525
17526
17527
17528
17529
17530
17531
17532
17533
17534
17535
17536
17537
17538
17539
17540
17541
17542
17543
17544
17545
17546
17547
17548
17549
17550
17551
17552
17553
17554
17555
17556
17557
17558
17559
17560
17561
17562
17563
17564
17565
17566
17567
17568
17569
17570
17571
17572
17573
17574
17575
17576
17577
17578
17579
17580
17581
17582
17583
17584
17585
17586
17587
17588
17589
17590
17591
17592
17593
17594
17595
17596
17597
17598
17599
17600
17601
17602
17603
17604
17605
17606
17607
17608
17609
17610
17611
17612
17613
17614
17615
17616
17617
17618
17619
17620
17621
17622
17623
17624
17625
17626
17627
17628
17629
17630
17631
17632
17633
17634
17635
17636
17637
17638
17639
17640
17641
17642
17643
17644
17645
17646
17647
17648
17649
17650
17651
17652
17653
17654
17655
17656
17657
17658
17659
17660
17661
17662
17663
17664
17665
17666
17667
17668
17669
17670
17671
17672
17673
17674
17675
17676
17677
17678
17679
17680
17681
17682
17683
17684
17685
17686
17687
17688
17689
17690
17691
17692
17693
17694
17695
17696
17697
17698
17699
17700
17701
17702
17703
17704
17705
17706
17707
17708
17709
17710
17711
17712
17713
17714
17715
17716
17717
17718
17719
17720
17721
17722
17723
17724
17725
17726
17727
17728
17729
17730
17731
17732
17733
17734
17735
17736
17737
17738
17739
17740
17741
17742
17743
17744
17745
17746
17747
17748
17749
17750
17751
17752
17753
17754
17755
17756
17757
17758
17759
17760
17761
17762
17763
17764
17765
17766
17767
17768
17769
17770
17771
17772
17773
17774
17775
17776
17777
17778
17779
17780
17781
17782
17783
17784
17785
17786
17787
17788
17789
17790
17791
17792
17793
17794
17795
17796
17797
17798
17799
17800
17801
17802
17803
17804
17805
17806
17807
17808
17809
17810
17811
17812
17813
17814
17815
17816
17817
17818
17819
17820
17821
17822
17823
17824
17825
17826
17827
17828
17829
17830
17831
17832
17833
17834
17835
17836
17837
17838
17839
17840
17841
17842
17843
17844
17845
17846
17847
17848
17849
17850
17851
17852
17853
17854
17855
17856
17857
17858
17859
17860
17861
17862
17863
17864
17865
17866
17867
17868
17869
17870
17871
17872
17873
17874
17875
17876
17877
17878
17879
17880
17881
17882
17883
17884
17885
17886
17887
17888
17889
17890
17891
17892
17893
17894
17895
17896
17897
17898
17899
17900
17901
17902
17903
17904
17905
17906
17907
17908
17909
17910
17911
17912
17913
17914
17915
17916
17917
17918
17919
17920
17921
17922
17923
17924
17925
17926
17927
17928
17929
17930
17931
17932
17933
17934
17935
17936
17937
17938
17939
17940
17941
17942
17943
17944
17945
17946
17947
17948
17949
17950
17951
17952
17953
17954
17955
17956
17957
17958
17959
17960
17961
17962
17963
17964
17965
17966
17967
17968
17969
17970
17971
17972
17973
17974
17975
17976
17977
17978
17979
17980
17981
17982
17983
17984
17985
17986
17987
17988
17989
17990
17991
17992
17993
17994
17995
17996
17997
17998
17999
18000
18001
18002
18003
18004
18005
18006
18007
18008
18009
18010
18011
18012
18013
18014
18015
18016
18017
18018
18019
18020
18021
18022
18023
18024
18025
18026
18027
18028
18029
18030
18031
18032
18033
18034
18035
18036
18037
18038
18039
18040
18041
18042
18043
18044
18045
18046
18047
18048
18049
18050
18051
18052
18053
18054
18055
18056
18057
18058
18059
18060
18061
18062
18063
18064
18065
18066
18067
18068
18069
18070
18071
18072
18073
18074
18075
18076
18077
18078
18079
18080
18081
18082
18083
18084
18085
18086
18087
18088
18089
18090
18091
18092
18093
18094
18095
18096
18097
18098
18099
18100
18101
18102
18103
18104
18105
18106
18107
18108
18109
18110
18111
18112
18113
18114
18115
18116
18117
18118
18119
18120
18121
18122
18123
18124
18125
18126
18127
18128
18129
18130
18131
18132
18133
18134
18135
18136
18137
18138
18139
18140
18141
18142
18143
18144
18145
18146
18147
18148
18149
18150
18151
18152
18153
18154
18155
18156
18157
18158
18159
18160
18161
18162
18163
18164
18165
18166
18167
18168
18169
18170
18171
18172
18173
18174
18175
18176
18177
18178
18179
18180
18181
18182
18183
18184
18185
18186
18187
18188
18189
18190
18191
18192
18193
18194
18195
18196
18197
18198
18199
18200
18201
18202
18203
18204
18205
18206
18207
18208
18209
18210
18211
18212
18213
18214
18215
18216
18217
18218
18219
18220
18221
18222
18223
18224
18225
18226
18227
18228
18229
18230
18231
18232
18233
18234
18235
18236
18237
18238
18239
18240
18241
18242
18243
18244
18245
18246
18247
18248
18249
18250
18251
18252
18253
18254
18255
18256
18257
18258
18259
18260
18261
18262
18263
18264
18265
18266
18267
18268
18269
18270
18271
18272
18273
18274
18275
18276
18277
18278
18279
18280
18281
18282
18283
18284
18285
18286
18287
18288
18289
18290
18291
18292
18293
18294
18295
18296
18297
18298
18299
18300
18301
18302
18303
18304
18305
18306
18307
18308
18309
18310
18311
18312
18313
18314
18315
18316
18317
18318
18319
18320
18321
18322
18323
18324
18325
18326
18327
18328
18329
18330
18331
18332
18333
18334
18335
18336
18337
18338
18339
18340
18341
18342
18343
18344
18345
18346
18347
18348
18349
18350
18351
18352
18353
18354
18355
18356
18357
18358
18359
18360
18361
18362
18363
18364
18365
18366
18367
18368
18369
18370
18371
18372
18373
18374
18375
18376
18377
18378
18379
18380
18381
18382
18383
18384
18385
18386
18387
18388
18389
18390
18391
18392
18393
18394
18395
18396
18397
18398
18399
18400
18401
18402
18403
18404
18405
18406
18407
18408
18409
18410
18411
18412
18413
18414
18415
18416
18417
18418
18419
18420
18421
18422
18423
18424
18425
18426
18427
18428
18429
18430
18431
18432
18433
18434
18435
18436
18437
18438
18439
18440
18441
18442
18443
18444
18445
18446
18447
18448
18449
18450
18451
18452
18453
18454
18455
18456
18457
18458
18459
18460
18461
18462
18463
18464
18465
18466
18467
18468
18469
18470
18471
18472
18473
18474
18475
18476
18477
18478
18479
18480
18481
18482
18483
18484
18485
18486
18487
18488
18489
18490
18491
18492
18493
18494
18495
18496
18497
18498
18499
18500
18501
18502
18503
18504
18505
18506
18507
18508
18509
18510
18511
18512
18513
18514
18515
18516
18517
18518
18519
18520
18521
18522
18523
18524
18525
18526
18527
18528
18529
18530
18531
18532
18533
18534
18535
18536
18537
18538
18539
18540
18541
18542
18543
18544
18545
18546
18547
18548
18549
18550
18551
18552
18553
18554
18555
18556
18557
18558
18559
18560
18561
18562
18563
18564
18565
18566
18567
18568
18569
18570
18571
18572
18573
18574
18575
18576
18577
18578
18579
18580
18581
18582
18583
18584
18585
18586
18587
18588
18589
18590
18591
18592
18593
18594
18595
18596
18597
18598
18599
18600
18601
18602
18603
18604
18605
18606
18607
18608
18609
18610
18611
18612
18613
18614
18615
18616
18617
18618
18619
18620
18621
18622
18623
18624
18625
18626
18627
18628
18629
18630
18631
18632
18633
18634
18635
18636
18637
18638
18639
18640
18641
18642
18643
18644
18645
18646
18647
18648
18649
18650
18651
18652
18653
18654
18655
18656
18657
18658
18659
18660
18661
18662
18663
18664
18665
18666
18667
18668
18669
18670
18671
18672
18673
18674
18675
18676
18677
18678
18679
18680
18681
18682
18683
18684
18685
18686
18687
18688
18689
18690
18691
18692
18693
18694
18695
18696
18697
18698
18699
18700
18701
18702
18703
18704
18705
18706
18707
18708
18709
18710
18711
18712
18713
18714
18715
18716
18717
18718
18719
18720
18721
18722
18723
18724
18725
18726
18727
18728
18729
18730
18731
18732
18733
18734
18735
18736
18737
18738
18739
18740
18741
18742
18743
18744
18745
18746
18747
18748
18749
18750
18751
18752
18753
18754
18755
18756
18757
18758
18759
18760
18761
18762
18763
18764
18765
18766
18767
18768
18769
18770
18771
18772
18773
18774
18775
18776
18777
18778
18779
18780
18781
18782
18783
18784
18785
18786
18787
18788
18789
18790
18791
18792
18793
18794
18795
18796
18797
18798
18799
18800
18801
18802
18803
18804
18805
18806
18807
18808
18809
18810
18811
18812
18813
18814
18815
18816
18817
18818
18819
18820
18821
18822
18823
18824
18825
18826
18827
18828
18829
18830
18831
18832
18833
18834
18835
18836
18837
18838
18839
18840
18841
18842
18843
18844
18845
18846
18847
18848
18849
18850
18851
18852
18853
18854
18855
18856
18857
18858
18859
18860
18861
18862
18863
18864
18865
18866
18867
18868
18869
18870
18871
18872
18873
18874
18875
18876
18877
18878
18879
18880
18881
18882
18883
18884
18885
18886
18887
18888
18889
18890
18891
18892
18893
18894
18895
18896
18897
18898
18899
18900
18901
18902
18903
18904
18905
18906
18907
18908
18909
18910
18911
18912
18913
18914
18915
18916
18917
18918
18919
18920
18921
18922
18923
18924
18925
18926
18927
18928
18929
18930
18931
18932
18933
18934
18935
18936
18937
18938
18939
18940
18941
18942
18943
18944
18945
18946
18947
18948
18949
18950
18951
18952
18953
18954
18955
18956
18957
18958
18959
18960
18961
18962
18963
18964
18965
18966
18967
18968
18969
18970
18971
18972
18973
18974
18975
18976
18977
18978
18979
18980
18981
18982
18983
18984
18985
18986
18987
18988
18989
18990
18991
18992
18993
18994
18995
18996
18997
18998
18999
19000
19001
19002
19003
19004
19005
19006
19007
19008
19009
19010
19011
19012
19013
19014
19015
19016
19017
19018
19019
19020
19021
19022
19023
19024
19025
19026
19027
19028
19029
19030
19031
19032
19033
19034
19035
19036
19037
19038
19039
19040
19041
19042
19043
19044
19045
19046
19047
19048
19049
19050
19051
19052
19053
19054
19055
19056
19057
19058
19059
19060
19061
19062
19063
19064
19065
19066
19067
19068
19069
19070
19071
19072
19073
19074
19075
19076
19077
19078
19079
19080
19081
19082
19083
19084
19085
19086
19087
19088
19089
19090
19091
19092
19093
19094
19095
19096
19097
19098
19099
19100
19101
19102
19103
19104
19105
19106
19107
19108
19109
19110
19111
19112
19113
19114
19115
19116
19117
19118
19119
19120
19121
19122
19123
19124
19125
19126
19127
19128
19129
19130
19131
19132
19133
19134
19135
19136
19137
19138
19139
19140
19141
19142
19143
19144
19145
19146
19147
19148
19149
19150
19151
19152
19153
19154
19155
19156
19157
19158
19159
19160
19161
19162
19163
19164
19165
19166
19167
19168
19169
19170
19171
19172
19173
19174
19175
19176
19177
19178
19179
19180
19181
19182
19183
19184
19185
19186
19187
19188
19189
19190
19191
19192
19193
19194
19195
19196
19197
19198
19199
19200
19201
19202
19203
19204
19205
19206
19207
19208
19209
19210
19211
19212
19213
19214
19215
19216
19217
19218
19219
19220
19221
19222
19223
19224
19225
19226
19227
19228
19229
19230
19231
19232
19233
19234
19235
19236
19237
19238
19239
19240
19241
19242
19243
19244
19245
19246
19247
19248
19249
19250
19251
19252
19253
19254
19255
19256
19257
19258
19259
19260
19261
19262
19263
19264
19265
19266
19267
19268
19269
19270
19271
19272
19273
19274
19275
19276
19277
19278
19279
19280
19281
19282
19283
19284
19285
19286
19287
19288
19289
19290
19291
19292
19293
19294
19295
19296
19297
19298
19299
19300
19301
19302
19303
19304
19305
19306
19307
19308
19309
19310
19311
19312
19313
19314
19315
19316
19317
19318
19319
19320
19321
19322
19323
19324
19325
19326
19327
19328
19329
19330
19331
19332
19333
19334
19335
19336
19337
19338
19339
19340
19341
19342
19343
19344
19345
19346
19347
19348
19349
19350
19351
19352
19353
19354
19355
19356
19357
19358
19359
19360
19361
19362
19363
19364
19365
19366
19367
19368
19369
19370
19371
19372
19373
19374
19375
19376
19377
19378
19379
19380
19381
19382
19383
19384
19385
19386
19387
19388
19389
19390
19391
19392
19393
19394
19395
19396
19397
19398
19399
19400
19401
19402
19403
19404
19405
19406
19407
19408
19409
19410
19411
19412
19413
19414
19415
19416
19417
19418
19419
19420
19421
19422
19423
19424
19425
19426
19427
19428
19429
19430
19431
19432
19433
19434
19435
19436
19437
19438
19439
19440
19441
19442
19443
19444
19445
19446
19447
19448
19449
19450
19451
19452
19453
19454
19455
19456
19457
19458
19459
19460
19461
19462
19463
19464
19465
19466
19467
19468
19469
19470
19471
19472
19473
19474
19475
19476
19477
19478
19479
19480
19481
19482
19483
19484
19485
19486
19487
19488
19489
19490
19491
19492
19493
19494
19495
19496
19497
19498
19499
19500
19501
19502
19503
19504
19505
19506
19507
19508
19509
19510
19511
19512
19513
19514
19515
19516
19517
19518
19519
19520
19521
19522
19523
19524
19525
19526
19527
19528
19529
19530
19531
19532
19533
19534
19535
19536
19537
19538
19539
19540
19541
19542
19543
19544
19545
19546
19547
19548
19549
19550
19551
19552
19553
19554
19555
19556
19557
19558
19559
19560
19561
19562
19563
19564
19565
19566
19567
19568
19569
19570
19571
19572
19573
19574
19575
19576
19577
19578
19579
19580
19581
19582
19583
19584
19585
19586
19587
19588
19589
19590
19591
19592
19593
19594
19595
19596
19597
19598
19599
19600
19601
19602
19603
19604
19605
19606
19607
19608
19609
19610
19611
19612
19613
19614
19615
19616
19617
19618
19619
19620
19621
19622
19623
19624
19625
19626
19627
19628
19629
19630
19631
19632
19633
19634
19635
19636
19637
19638
19639
19640
19641
19642
19643
19644
19645
19646
19647
19648
19649
19650
19651
19652
19653
19654
19655
19656
19657
19658
19659
19660
19661
19662
19663
19664
19665
19666
19667
19668
19669
19670
19671
19672
19673
19674
19675
19676
19677
19678
19679
19680
19681
19682
19683
19684
19685
19686
19687
19688
19689
19690
19691
19692
19693
19694
19695
19696
19697
19698
19699
19700
19701
19702
19703
19704
19705
19706
19707
19708
19709
19710
19711
19712
19713
19714
19715
19716
19717
19718
19719
19720
19721
19722
19723
19724
19725
19726
19727
19728
19729
19730
19731
19732
19733
19734
19735
19736
19737
19738
19739
19740
19741
19742
19743
19744
19745
19746
19747
19748
19749
19750
19751
19752
19753
19754
19755
19756
19757
19758
19759
19760
19761
19762
19763
19764
19765
19766
19767
19768
19769
19770
19771
19772
19773
19774
19775
19776
19777
19778
19779
19780
19781
19782
19783
19784
19785
19786
19787
19788
19789
19790
19791
19792
19793
19794
19795
19796
19797
19798
19799
19800
19801
19802
19803
19804
19805
19806
19807
19808
19809
19810
19811
19812
19813
19814
19815
19816
19817
19818
19819
19820
19821
19822
19823
19824
19825
19826
19827
19828
19829
19830
19831
19832
19833
19834
19835
19836
19837
19838
19839
19840
19841
19842
19843
19844
19845
19846
19847
19848
19849
19850
19851
19852
19853
19854
19855
19856
19857
19858
19859
19860
19861
19862
19863
19864
19865
19866
19867
19868
19869
19870
19871
19872
19873
19874
19875
19876
19877
19878
19879
19880
19881
19882
19883
19884
19885
19886
19887
19888
19889
19890
19891
19892
19893
19894
19895
19896
19897
19898
19899
19900
19901
19902
19903
19904
19905
19906
19907
19908
19909
19910
19911
19912
19913
19914
19915
19916
19917
19918
19919
19920
19921
19922
19923
19924
19925
19926
19927
19928
19929
19930
19931
19932
19933
19934
19935
19936
19937
19938
19939
19940
19941
19942
19943
19944
19945
19946
19947
19948
19949
19950
19951
19952
19953
19954
19955
19956
19957
19958
19959
19960
19961
19962
19963
19964
19965
19966
19967
19968
19969
19970
19971
19972
19973
19974
19975
19976
19977
19978
19979
19980
19981
19982
19983
19984
19985
19986
19987
19988
19989
19990
19991
19992
19993
19994
19995
19996
19997
19998
19999
20000
20001
20002
20003
20004
20005
20006
20007
20008
20009
20010
20011
20012
20013
20014
20015
20016
20017
20018
20019
20020
20021
20022
20023
20024
20025
20026
20027
20028
20029
20030
20031
20032
20033
20034
20035
20036
20037
20038
20039
20040
20041
20042
20043
20044
20045
20046
20047
20048
20049
20050
20051
20052
20053
20054
20055
20056
20057
20058
20059
20060
20061
20062
20063
20064
20065
20066
20067
20068
20069
20070
20071
20072
20073
20074
20075
20076
20077
20078
20079
20080
20081
20082
20083
20084
20085
20086
20087
20088
20089
20090
20091
20092
20093
20094
20095
20096
20097
20098
20099
20100
20101
20102
20103
20104
20105
20106
20107
20108
20109
20110
20111
20112
20113
20114
20115
20116
20117
20118
20119
20120
20121
20122
20123
20124
20125
20126
20127
20128
20129
20130
20131
20132
20133
20134
20135
20136
20137
20138
20139
20140
20141
20142
20143
20144
20145
20146
20147
20148
20149
20150
20151
20152
20153
20154
20155
20156
20157
20158
20159
20160
20161
20162
20163
20164
20165
20166
20167
20168
20169
20170
20171
20172
20173
20174
20175
20176
20177
20178
20179
20180
20181
20182
20183
20184
20185
20186
20187
20188
20189
20190
20191
20192
20193
20194
20195
20196
20197
20198
20199
20200
20201
20202
20203
20204
20205
20206
20207
20208
20209
20210
20211
20212
20213
20214
20215
20216
20217
20218
20219
20220
20221
20222
20223
20224
20225
20226
20227
20228
20229
20230
20231
20232
20233
20234
20235
20236
20237
20238
20239
20240
20241
20242
20243
20244
20245
20246
20247
20248
20249
20250
20251
20252
20253
20254
20255
20256
20257
20258
20259
20260
20261
20262
20263
20264
20265
20266
20267
20268
20269
20270
20271
20272
20273
20274
20275
20276
20277
20278
20279
20280
20281
20282
20283
20284
20285
20286
20287
20288
20289
20290
20291
20292
20293
20294
20295
20296
20297
20298
20299
20300
20301
20302
20303
20304
20305
20306
20307
20308
20309
20310
20311
20312
20313
20314
20315
20316
20317
20318
20319
20320
20321
20322
20323
20324
20325
20326
20327
20328
20329
20330
20331
20332
20333
20334
20335
20336
20337
20338
20339
20340
20341
20342
20343
20344
20345
20346
20347
20348
20349
20350
20351
20352
20353
20354
20355
20356
20357
20358
20359
20360
20361
20362
20363
20364
20365
20366
20367
20368
20369
20370
20371
20372
20373
20374
20375
20376
20377
20378
20379
20380
20381
20382
20383
20384
20385
20386
20387
20388
20389
20390
20391
20392
20393
20394
20395
20396
20397
20398
20399
20400
20401
20402
20403
20404
20405
20406
20407
20408
20409
20410
20411
20412
20413
20414
20415
20416
20417
20418
20419
20420
20421
20422
20423
20424
20425
20426
20427
20428
20429
20430
20431
20432
20433
20434
20435
20436
20437
20438
20439
20440
20441
20442
20443
20444
20445
20446
20447
20448
20449
20450
20451
20452
20453
20454
20455
20456
20457
20458
20459
20460
20461
20462
20463
20464
20465
20466
20467
20468
20469
20470
20471
20472
20473
20474
20475
20476
20477
20478
20479
20480
20481
20482
20483
20484
20485
20486
20487
20488
20489
20490
20491
20492
20493
20494
20495
20496
20497
20498
20499
20500
20501
20502
20503
20504
20505
20506
20507
20508
20509
20510
20511
20512
20513
20514
20515
20516
20517
20518
20519
20520
20521
20522
20523
20524
20525
20526
20527
20528
20529
20530
20531
20532
20533
20534
20535
20536
20537
20538
20539
20540
20541
20542
20543
20544
20545
20546
20547
20548
20549
20550
20551
20552
20553
20554
20555
20556
20557
20558
20559
20560
20561
20562
20563
20564
20565
20566
20567
20568
20569
20570
20571
20572
20573
20574
20575
20576
20577
20578
20579
20580
20581
20582
20583
20584
20585
20586
20587
20588
20589
20590
20591
20592
20593
20594
20595
20596
20597
20598
20599
20600
20601
20602
20603
20604
20605
20606
20607
20608
20609
20610
20611
20612
20613
20614
20615
20616
20617
20618
20619
20620
20621
20622
20623
20624
20625
20626
20627
20628
20629
20630
20631
20632
20633
20634
20635
20636
20637
20638
20639
20640
20641
20642
20643
20644
20645
20646
20647
20648
20649
20650
20651
20652
20653
20654
20655
20656
20657
20658
20659
20660
20661
20662
20663
20664
20665
20666
20667
20668
20669
20670
20671
20672
20673
20674
20675
20676
20677
20678
20679
20680
20681
20682
20683
20684
20685
20686
20687
20688
20689
20690
20691
20692
20693
20694
20695
20696
20697
20698
20699
20700
20701
20702
20703
20704
20705
20706
20707
20708
20709
20710
20711
20712
20713
20714
20715
20716
20717
20718
20719
20720
20721
20722
20723
20724
20725
20726
20727
20728
20729
20730
20731
20732
20733
20734
20735
20736
20737
20738
20739
20740
20741
20742
20743
20744
20745
20746
20747
20748
20749
20750
20751
20752
20753
20754
20755
20756
20757
20758
20759
20760
20761
20762
20763
20764
20765
20766
20767
20768
20769
20770
20771
20772
20773
20774
20775
20776
20777
20778
20779
20780
20781
20782
20783
20784
20785
20786
20787
20788
20789
20790
20791
20792
20793
20794
20795
20796
20797
20798
20799
20800
20801
20802
20803
20804
20805
20806
20807
20808
20809
20810
20811
20812
20813
20814
20815
20816
20817
20818
20819
20820
20821
20822
20823
20824
20825
20826
20827
20828
20829
20830
20831
20832
20833
20834
20835
20836
20837
20838
20839
20840
20841
20842
20843
20844
20845
20846
20847
20848
20849
20850
20851
20852
20853
20854
20855
20856
20857
20858
20859
20860
20861
20862
20863
20864
20865
20866
20867
20868
20869
20870
20871
20872
20873
20874
20875
20876
20877
20878
20879
20880
20881
20882
20883
20884
20885
20886
20887
20888
20889
20890
20891
20892
20893
20894
20895
20896
20897
20898
20899
20900
20901
20902
20903
20904
20905
20906
20907
20908
20909
20910
20911
20912
20913
20914
20915
20916
20917
20918
20919
20920
20921
20922
20923
20924
20925
20926
20927
20928
20929
20930
20931
20932
20933
20934
20935
20936
20937
20938
20939
20940
20941
20942
20943
20944
20945
20946
20947
20948
20949
20950
20951
20952
20953
20954
20955
20956
20957
20958
20959
20960
20961
20962
20963
20964
20965
20966
20967
20968
20969
20970
20971
20972
20973
20974
20975
20976
20977
20978
20979
20980
20981
20982
20983
20984
20985
20986
20987
20988
20989
20990
20991
20992
20993
20994
20995
20996
20997
20998
20999
21000
21001
21002
21003
21004
21005
21006
21007
21008
21009
21010
21011
21012
21013
21014
21015
21016
21017
21018
21019
21020
21021
21022
21023
21024
21025
21026
21027
21028
21029
21030
21031
21032
21033
21034
21035
21036
21037
21038
21039
21040
21041
21042
21043
21044
21045
21046
21047
21048
21049
21050
21051
21052
21053
21054
21055
21056
21057
21058
21059
21060
21061
21062
21063
21064
21065
21066
21067
21068
21069
21070
21071
21072
21073
21074
21075
21076
21077
21078
21079
21080
21081
21082
21083
21084
21085
21086
21087
21088
21089
21090
21091
21092
21093
21094
21095
21096
21097
21098
21099
21100
21101
21102
21103
21104
21105
21106
21107
21108
21109
21110
21111
21112
21113
21114
21115
21116
21117
21118
21119
21120
21121
21122
21123
21124
21125
21126
21127
21128
21129
21130
21131
21132
21133
21134
21135
21136
21137
21138
21139
21140
21141
21142
21143
21144
21145
21146
21147
21148
21149
21150
21151
21152
21153
21154
21155
21156
21157
21158
21159
21160
21161
21162
21163
21164
21165
21166
21167
21168
21169
21170
21171
21172
21173
21174
21175
21176
21177
21178
21179
21180
21181
21182
21183
21184
21185
21186
21187
21188
21189
21190
21191
21192
21193
21194
21195
21196
21197
21198
21199
21200
21201
21202
21203
21204
21205
21206
21207
21208
21209
21210
21211
21212
21213
21214
21215
21216
21217
21218
21219
21220
21221
21222
21223
21224
21225
21226
21227
21228
21229
21230
21231
21232
21233
21234
21235
21236
21237
21238
21239
21240
21241
21242
21243
21244
21245
21246
21247
21248
21249
21250
21251
21252
21253
21254
21255
21256
21257
21258
21259
21260
21261
21262
21263
21264
21265
21266
21267
21268
21269
21270
21271
21272
21273
21274
21275
21276
21277
21278
21279
21280
21281
21282
21283
21284
21285
21286
21287
21288
21289
21290
21291
21292
21293
21294
21295
21296
21297
21298
21299
21300
21301
21302
21303
21304
21305
21306
21307
21308
21309
21310
21311
21312
21313
21314
21315
21316
21317
21318
21319
21320
21321
21322
21323
21324
21325
21326
21327
21328
21329
21330
21331
21332
21333
21334
21335
21336
21337
21338
21339
21340
21341
21342
21343
21344
21345
21346
21347
21348
21349
21350
21351
21352
21353
21354
21355
21356
21357
21358
21359
21360
21361
21362
21363
21364
21365
21366
21367
21368
21369
21370
21371
21372
21373
21374
21375
21376
21377
21378
21379
21380
21381
21382
21383
21384
21385
21386
21387
21388
21389
21390
21391
21392
21393
21394
21395
21396
21397
21398
21399
21400
21401
21402
21403
21404
21405
21406
21407
21408
21409
21410
21411
21412
21413
21414
21415
21416
21417
21418
21419
21420
21421
21422
21423
21424
21425
21426
21427
21428
21429
21430
21431
21432
21433
21434
21435
21436
21437
21438
21439
21440
21441
21442
21443
21444
21445
21446
21447
21448
21449
21450
21451
21452
21453
21454
21455
21456
21457
21458
21459
21460
21461
21462
21463
21464
21465
21466
21467
21468
21469
21470
21471
21472
21473
21474
21475
21476
21477
21478
21479
21480
21481
21482
21483
21484
21485
21486
21487
21488
21489
21490
21491
21492
21493
21494
21495
21496
21497
21498
21499
21500
21501
21502
21503
21504
21505
21506
21507
21508
21509
21510
21511
21512
21513
21514
21515
21516
21517
21518
21519
21520
21521
21522
21523
21524
21525
21526
21527
21528
21529
21530
21531
21532
21533
21534
21535
21536
21537
21538
21539
21540
21541
21542
21543
21544
21545
21546
21547
21548
21549
21550
21551
21552
21553
21554
21555
21556
21557
21558
21559
21560
21561
21562
21563
21564
21565
21566
21567
21568
21569
21570
21571
21572
21573
21574
21575
21576
21577
21578
21579
21580
21581
21582
21583
21584
21585
21586
21587
21588
21589
21590
21591
21592
21593
21594
21595
21596
21597
21598
21599
21600
21601
21602
21603
21604
21605
21606
21607
21608
21609
21610
21611
21612
21613
21614
21615
21616
21617
21618
21619
21620
21621
21622
21623
21624
21625
21626
21627
21628
21629
21630
21631
21632
21633
21634
21635
21636
21637
21638
21639
21640
21641
21642
21643
21644
21645
21646
21647
21648
21649
21650
21651
21652
21653
21654
21655
21656
21657
21658
21659
21660
21661
21662
21663
21664
21665
21666
21667
21668
21669
21670
21671
21672
21673
21674
21675
21676
21677
21678
21679
21680
21681
21682
21683
21684
21685
21686
21687
21688
21689
21690
21691
21692
21693
21694
21695
21696
21697
21698
21699
21700
21701
21702
21703
21704
21705
21706
21707
21708
21709
21710
21711
21712
21713
21714
21715
21716
21717
21718
21719
21720
21721
21722
21723
21724
21725
21726
21727
21728
21729
21730
21731
21732
21733
21734
21735
21736
21737
21738
21739
21740
21741
21742
21743
21744
21745
21746
21747
21748
21749
21750
21751
21752
21753
21754
21755
21756
21757
21758
21759
21760
21761
21762
21763
21764
21765
21766
21767
21768
21769
21770
21771
21772
21773
21774
21775
21776
21777
21778
21779
21780
21781
21782
21783
21784
21785
21786
21787
21788
21789
21790
21791
21792
21793
21794
21795
21796
21797
21798
21799
21800
21801
21802
21803
21804
21805
21806
21807
21808
21809
21810
21811
21812
21813
21814
21815
21816
21817
21818
21819
21820
21821
21822
21823
21824
21825
21826
21827
21828
21829
21830
21831
21832
21833
21834
21835
21836
21837
21838
21839
21840
21841
21842
21843
21844
21845
21846
21847
21848
21849
21850
21851
21852
21853
21854
21855
21856
21857
21858
21859
21860
21861
21862
21863
21864
21865
21866
21867
21868
21869
21870
21871
21872
21873
21874
21875
21876
21877
21878
21879
21880
21881
21882
21883
21884
21885
21886
21887
21888
21889
21890
21891
21892
21893
21894
21895
21896
21897
21898
21899
21900
21901
21902
21903
21904
21905
21906
21907
21908
21909
21910
21911
21912
21913
21914
21915
21916
21917
21918
21919
21920
21921
21922
21923
21924
21925
21926
21927
21928
21929
21930
21931
21932
21933
21934
21935
21936
21937
21938
21939
21940
21941
21942
21943
21944
21945
21946
21947
21948
21949
21950
21951
21952
21953
21954
21955
21956
21957
21958
21959
21960
21961
21962
21963
21964
21965
21966
21967
21968
21969
21970
21971
21972
21973
21974
21975
21976
21977
21978
21979
21980
21981
21982
21983
21984
21985
21986
21987
21988
21989
21990
21991
21992
21993
21994
21995
21996
21997
21998
21999
22000
22001
22002
22003
22004
22005
22006
22007
22008
22009
22010
22011
22012
22013
22014
22015
22016
22017
22018
22019
22020
22021
22022
22023
22024
22025
22026
22027
22028
22029
22030
22031
22032
22033
22034
22035
22036
22037
22038
22039
22040
22041
22042
22043
22044
22045
22046
22047
22048
22049
22050
22051
22052
22053
22054
22055
22056
22057
22058
22059
22060
22061
22062
22063
22064
22065
22066
22067
22068
22069
22070
22071
22072
22073
22074
22075
22076
22077
22078
22079
22080
22081
22082
22083
22084
22085
22086
22087
22088
22089
22090
22091
22092
22093
22094
22095
22096
22097
22098
22099
22100
22101
22102
22103
22104
22105
22106
22107
22108
22109
22110
22111
22112
22113
22114
22115
22116
22117
22118
22119
22120
22121
22122
22123
22124
22125
22126
22127
22128
22129
22130
22131
22132
22133
22134
22135
22136
22137
22138
22139
22140
22141
22142
22143
22144
22145
22146
22147
22148
22149
22150
22151
22152
22153
22154
22155
22156
22157
22158
22159
22160
22161
22162
22163
22164
22165
22166
22167
22168
22169
22170
22171
22172
22173
22174
22175
22176
22177
22178
22179
22180
22181
22182
22183
22184
22185
22186
22187
22188
22189
22190
22191
22192
22193
22194
22195
22196
22197
22198
22199
22200
22201
22202
22203
22204
22205
22206
22207
22208
22209
22210
22211
22212
22213
22214
22215
22216
22217
22218
22219
22220
22221
22222
22223
22224
22225
22226
22227
22228
22229
22230
22231
22232
22233
22234
22235
22236
22237
22238
22239
22240
22241
22242
22243
22244
22245
22246
22247
22248
22249
22250
22251
22252
22253
22254
22255
22256
22257
22258
22259
22260
22261
22262
22263
22264
22265
22266
22267
22268
22269
22270
22271
22272
22273
22274
22275
22276
22277
22278
22279
22280
22281
22282
22283
22284
22285
22286
22287
22288
22289
22290
22291
22292
22293
22294
22295
22296
22297
22298
22299
22300
22301
22302
22303
22304
22305
22306
22307
22308
22309
22310
22311
22312
22313
22314
22315
22316
22317
22318
22319
22320
22321
22322
22323
22324
22325
22326
22327
22328
22329
22330
22331
22332
22333
22334
22335
22336
22337
22338
22339
22340
22341
22342
22343
22344
22345
22346
22347
22348
22349
22350
22351
22352
22353
22354
22355
22356
22357
22358
22359
22360
22361
22362
22363
22364
22365
22366
22367
22368
22369
22370
22371
22372
22373
22374
22375
22376
22377
22378
22379
22380
22381
22382
22383
22384
22385
22386
22387
22388
22389
22390
22391
22392
22393
22394
22395
22396
22397
22398
22399
22400
22401
22402
22403
22404
22405
22406
22407
22408
22409
22410
22411
22412
22413
22414
22415
22416
22417
22418
22419
22420
22421
22422
22423
22424
22425
22426
22427
22428
22429
22430
22431
22432
22433
22434
22435
22436
22437
22438
22439
22440
22441
22442
22443
22444
22445
22446
22447
22448
22449
22450
22451
22452
22453
22454
22455
22456
22457
22458
22459
22460
22461
22462
22463
22464
22465
22466
22467
22468
22469
22470
22471
22472
22473
22474
22475
22476
22477
22478
22479
22480
22481
22482
22483
22484
22485
22486
22487
22488
22489
22490
22491
22492
22493
22494
22495
22496
22497
22498
22499
22500
22501
22502
22503
22504
22505
22506
22507
22508
22509
22510
22511
22512
22513
22514
22515
22516
22517
22518
22519
22520
22521
22522
22523
22524
22525
22526
22527
22528
22529
22530
22531
22532
22533
22534
22535
22536
22537
22538
22539
22540
22541
22542
22543
22544
22545
22546
22547
22548
22549
22550
22551
22552
22553
22554
22555
22556
22557
22558
22559
22560
22561
22562
22563
22564
22565
22566
22567
22568
22569
22570
22571
22572
22573
22574
22575
22576
22577
22578
22579
22580
22581
22582
22583
22584
22585
22586
22587
22588
22589
22590
22591
22592
22593
22594
22595
22596
22597
22598
22599
22600
22601
22602
22603
22604
22605
22606
22607
22608
22609
22610
22611
22612
22613
22614
22615
22616
22617
22618
22619
22620
22621
22622
22623
22624
22625
22626
22627
22628
22629
22630
22631
22632
22633
22634
22635
22636
22637
22638
22639
22640
22641
22642
22643
22644
22645
22646
22647
22648
22649
22650
22651
22652
22653
22654
22655
22656
22657
22658
22659
22660
22661
22662
22663
22664
22665
22666
22667
22668
22669
22670
22671
22672
22673
22674
22675
22676
22677
22678
22679
22680
22681
22682
22683
22684
22685
22686
22687
22688
22689
22690
22691
22692
22693
22694
22695
22696
22697
22698
22699
22700
22701
22702
22703
22704
22705
22706
22707
22708
22709
22710
22711
22712
22713
22714
22715
22716
22717
22718
22719
22720
22721
22722
22723
22724
22725
22726
22727
22728
22729
22730
22731
22732
22733
22734
22735
22736
22737
22738
22739
22740
22741
22742
22743
22744
22745
22746
22747
22748
22749
22750
22751
22752
22753
22754
22755
22756
22757
22758
22759
22760
22761
22762
22763
22764
22765
22766
22767
22768
22769
22770
22771
22772
22773
22774
22775
22776
22777
22778
22779
22780
22781
22782
22783
22784
22785
22786
22787
22788
22789
22790
22791
22792
22793
22794
22795
22796
22797
22798
22799
22800
22801
22802
22803
22804
22805
22806
22807
22808
22809
22810
22811
22812
22813
22814
22815
22816
22817
22818
22819
22820
22821
22822
22823
22824
22825
22826
22827
22828
22829
22830
22831
22832
22833
22834
22835
22836
22837
22838
22839
22840
22841
22842
22843
22844
22845
22846
22847
22848
22849
22850
22851
22852
22853
22854
22855
22856
22857
22858
22859
22860
22861
22862
22863
22864
22865
22866
22867
22868
22869
22870
22871
22872
22873
22874
22875
22876
22877
22878
22879
22880
22881
22882
22883
22884
22885
22886
22887
22888
22889
22890
22891
22892
22893
22894
22895
22896
22897
22898
22899
22900
22901
22902
22903
22904
22905
22906
22907
22908
22909
22910
22911
22912
22913
22914
22915
22916
22917
22918
22919
22920
22921
22922
22923
22924
22925
22926
22927
22928
22929
22930
22931
22932
22933
22934
22935
22936
22937
22938
22939
22940
22941
22942
22943
22944
22945
22946
22947
22948
22949
22950
22951
22952
22953
22954
22955
22956
22957
22958
22959
22960
22961
22962
22963
22964
22965
22966
22967
22968
22969
22970
22971
22972
22973
22974
22975
22976
22977
22978
22979
22980
22981
22982
22983
22984
22985
22986
22987
22988
22989
22990
22991
22992
22993
22994
22995
22996
22997
22998
22999
23000
23001
23002
23003
23004
23005
23006
23007
23008
23009
23010
23011
23012
23013
23014
23015
23016
23017
23018
23019
23020
23021
23022
23023
23024
23025
23026
23027
23028
23029
23030
23031
23032
23033
23034
23035
23036
23037
23038
23039
23040
23041
23042
23043
23044
23045
23046
23047
23048
23049
23050
23051
23052
23053
23054
23055
23056
23057
23058
23059
23060
23061
23062
23063
23064
23065
23066
23067
23068
23069
23070
23071
23072
23073
23074
23075
23076
23077
23078
23079
23080
23081
23082
23083
23084
23085
23086
23087
23088
23089
23090
23091
23092
23093
23094
23095
23096
23097
23098
23099
23100
23101
23102
23103
23104
23105
23106
23107
23108
23109
23110
23111
23112
23113
23114
23115
23116
23117
23118
23119
23120
23121
23122
23123
23124
23125
23126
23127
23128
23129
23130
23131
23132
23133
23134
23135
23136
23137
23138
23139
23140
23141
23142
23143
23144
23145
23146
23147
23148
23149
23150
23151
23152
23153
23154
23155
23156
23157
23158
23159
23160
23161
23162
23163
23164
23165
23166
23167
23168
23169
23170
23171
23172
23173
23174
23175
23176
23177
23178
23179
23180
23181
23182
23183
23184
23185
23186
23187
23188
23189
23190
23191
23192
23193
23194
23195
23196
23197
23198
23199
23200
23201
23202
23203
23204
23205
23206
23207
23208
23209
23210
23211
23212
23213
23214
23215
23216
23217
23218
23219
23220
23221
23222
23223
23224
23225
23226
23227
23228
23229
23230
23231
23232
23233
23234
23235
23236
23237
23238
23239
23240
23241
23242
23243
23244
23245
23246
23247
23248
23249
23250
23251
23252
23253
23254
23255
23256
23257
23258
23259
23260
23261
23262
23263
23264
23265
23266
23267
23268
23269
23270
23271
23272
23273
23274
23275
23276
23277
23278
23279
23280
23281
23282
23283
23284
23285
23286
23287
23288
23289
23290
23291
23292
23293
23294
23295
23296
23297
23298
23299
23300
23301
23302
23303
23304
23305
23306
23307
23308
23309
23310
23311
23312
23313
23314
23315
23316
23317
23318
23319
23320
23321
23322
23323
23324
23325
23326
23327
23328
23329
23330
23331
23332
23333
23334
23335
23336
23337
23338
23339
23340
23341
23342
23343
23344
23345
23346
23347
23348
23349
23350
23351
23352
23353
23354
23355
23356
23357
23358
23359
23360
23361
23362
23363
23364
23365
23366
23367
23368
23369
23370
23371
23372
23373
23374
23375
23376
23377
23378
23379
23380
23381
23382
23383
23384
23385
23386
23387
23388
23389
23390
23391
23392
23393
23394
23395
23396
23397
23398
23399
23400
23401
23402
23403
23404
23405
23406
23407
23408
23409
23410
23411
23412
23413
23414
23415
23416
23417
23418
23419
23420
23421
23422
23423
23424
23425
23426
23427
23428
23429
23430
23431
23432
23433
23434
23435
23436
23437
23438
23439
23440
23441
23442
23443
23444
23445
23446
23447
23448
23449
23450
23451
23452
23453
23454
23455
23456
23457
23458
23459
23460
23461
23462
23463
23464
23465
23466
23467
23468
23469
23470
23471
23472
23473
23474
23475
23476
23477
23478
23479
23480
23481
23482
23483
23484
23485
23486
23487
23488
23489
23490
23491
23492
23493
23494
23495
23496
23497
23498
23499
23500
23501
23502
23503
23504
23505
23506
23507
23508
23509
23510
23511
23512
23513
23514
23515
23516
23517
23518
23519
23520
23521
23522
23523
23524
23525
23526
23527
23528
23529
23530
23531
23532
23533
23534
23535
23536
23537
23538
23539
23540
23541
23542
23543
23544
23545
23546
23547
23548
23549
23550
23551
23552
23553
23554
23555
23556
23557
23558
23559
23560
23561
23562
23563
23564
23565
23566
23567
23568
23569
23570
23571
23572
23573
23574
23575
23576
23577
23578
23579
23580
23581
23582
23583
23584
23585
23586
23587
23588
23589
23590
23591
23592
23593
23594
23595
23596
23597
23598
23599
23600
23601
23602
23603
23604
23605
23606
23607
23608
23609
23610
23611
23612
23613
23614
23615
23616
23617
23618
23619
23620
23621
23622
23623
23624
23625
23626
23627
23628
23629
23630
23631
23632
23633
23634
23635
23636
23637
23638
23639
23640
23641
23642
23643
23644
23645
23646
23647
23648
23649
23650
23651
23652
23653
23654
23655
23656
23657
23658
23659
23660
23661
23662
23663
23664
23665
23666
23667
23668
23669
23670
23671
23672
23673
23674
23675
23676
23677
23678
23679
23680
23681
23682
23683
23684
23685
23686
23687
23688
23689
23690
23691
23692
23693
23694
23695
23696
23697
23698
23699
23700
23701
23702
23703
23704
23705
23706
23707
23708
23709
23710
23711
23712
23713
23714
23715
23716
23717
23718
23719
23720
23721
23722
23723
23724
23725
23726
23727
23728
23729
23730
23731
23732
23733
23734
23735
23736
23737
23738
23739
23740
23741
23742
23743
23744
23745
23746
23747
23748
23749
23750
23751
23752
23753
23754
23755
23756
23757
23758
23759
23760
23761
23762
23763
23764
23765
23766
23767
23768
23769
23770
23771
23772
23773
23774
23775
23776
23777
23778
23779
23780
23781
23782
23783
23784
23785
23786
23787
23788
23789
23790
23791
23792
23793
23794
23795
23796
23797
23798
23799
23800
23801
23802
23803
23804
23805
23806
23807
23808
23809
23810
23811
23812
23813
23814
23815
23816
23817
23818
23819
23820
23821
23822
23823
23824
23825
23826
23827
23828
23829
23830
23831
23832
23833
23834
23835
23836
23837
23838
23839
23840
23841
23842
23843
23844
23845
23846
23847
23848
23849
23850
23851
23852
23853
23854
23855
23856
23857
23858
23859
23860
23861
23862
23863
23864
23865
23866
23867
23868
23869
23870
23871
23872
23873
23874
23875
23876
23877
23878
23879
23880
23881
23882
23883
23884
23885
23886
23887
23888
23889
23890
23891
23892
23893
23894
23895
23896
23897
23898
23899
23900
23901
23902
23903
23904
23905
23906
23907
23908
23909
23910
23911
23912
23913
23914
23915
23916
23917
23918
23919
23920
23921
23922
23923
23924
23925
23926
23927
23928
23929
23930
23931
23932
23933
23934
23935
23936
23937
23938
23939
23940
23941
23942
23943
23944
23945
23946
23947
23948
23949
23950
23951
23952
23953
23954
23955
23956
23957
23958
23959
23960
23961
23962
23963
23964
23965
23966
23967
23968
23969
23970
23971
23972
23973
23974
23975
23976
23977
23978
23979
23980
23981
23982
23983
23984
23985
23986
23987
23988
23989
23990
23991
23992
23993
23994
23995
23996
23997
23998
23999
24000
24001
24002
24003
24004
24005
24006
24007
24008
24009
24010
24011
24012
24013
24014
24015
24016
24017
24018
24019
24020
24021
24022
24023
24024
24025
24026
24027
24028
24029
24030
24031
24032
24033
24034
24035
24036
24037
24038
24039
24040
24041
24042
24043
24044
24045
24046
24047
24048
24049
24050
24051
24052
24053
24054
24055
24056
24057
24058
24059
24060
24061
24062
24063
24064
24065
24066
24067
24068
24069
24070
24071
24072
24073
24074
24075
24076
24077
24078
24079
24080
24081
24082
24083
24084
24085
24086
24087
24088
24089
24090
24091
24092
24093
24094
24095
24096
24097
24098
24099
24100
24101
24102
24103
24104
24105
24106
24107
24108
24109
24110
24111
24112
24113
24114
24115
24116
24117
24118
24119
24120
24121
24122
24123
24124
24125
24126
24127
24128
24129
24130
24131
24132
24133
24134
24135
24136
24137
24138
24139
24140
24141
24142
24143
24144
24145
24146
24147
24148
24149
24150
24151
24152
24153
24154
24155
24156
24157
24158
24159
24160
24161
24162
24163
24164
24165
24166
24167
24168
24169
24170
24171
24172
24173
24174
24175
24176
24177
24178
24179
24180
24181
24182
24183
24184
24185
24186
24187
24188
24189
24190
24191
24192
24193
24194
24195
24196
24197
24198
24199
24200
24201
24202
24203
24204
24205
24206
24207
24208
24209
24210
24211
24212
24213
24214
24215
24216
24217
24218
24219
24220
24221
24222
24223
24224
24225
24226
24227
24228
24229
24230
24231
24232
24233
24234
24235
24236
24237
24238
24239
24240
24241
24242
24243
24244
24245
24246
24247
24248
24249
24250
24251
24252
24253
24254
24255
24256
24257
24258
24259
24260
24261
24262
24263
24264
24265
24266
24267
24268
24269
24270
24271
24272
24273
24274
24275
24276
24277
24278
24279
24280
24281
24282
24283
24284
24285
24286
24287
24288
24289
24290
24291
24292
24293
24294
24295
24296
24297
24298
24299
24300
24301
24302
24303
24304
24305
24306
24307
24308
24309
24310
24311
24312
24313
24314
24315
24316
24317
24318
24319
24320
24321
24322
24323
24324
24325
24326
24327
24328
24329
24330
24331
24332
24333
24334
24335
24336
24337
24338
24339
24340
24341
24342
24343
24344
24345
24346
24347
24348
24349
24350
24351
24352
24353
24354
24355
24356
24357
24358
24359
24360
24361
24362
24363
24364
24365
24366
24367
24368
24369
24370
24371
24372
24373
24374
24375
24376
24377
24378
24379
24380
24381
24382
24383
24384
24385
24386
24387
24388
24389
24390
24391
24392
24393
24394
24395
24396
24397
24398
24399
24400
24401
24402
24403
24404
24405
24406
24407
24408
24409
24410
24411
24412
24413
24414
24415
24416
24417
24418
24419
24420
24421
24422
24423
24424
24425
24426
24427
24428
24429
24430
24431
24432
24433
24434
24435
24436
24437
24438
24439
24440
24441
24442
24443
24444
24445
24446
24447
24448
24449
24450
24451
24452
24453
24454
24455
24456
24457
24458
24459
24460
24461
24462
24463
24464
24465
24466
24467
24468
24469
24470
24471
24472
24473
24474
24475
24476
24477
24478
24479
24480
24481
24482
24483
24484
24485
24486
24487
24488
24489
24490
24491
24492
24493
24494
24495
24496
24497
24498
24499
24500
24501
24502
24503
24504
24505
24506
24507
24508
24509
24510
24511
24512
24513
24514
24515
24516
24517
24518
24519
24520
24521
24522
24523
24524
24525
24526
24527
24528
24529
24530
24531
24532
24533
24534
24535
24536
24537
24538
24539
24540
24541
24542
24543
24544
24545
24546
24547
24548
24549
24550
24551
24552
24553
24554
24555
24556
24557
24558
24559
24560
24561
24562
24563
24564
24565
24566
24567
24568
24569
24570
24571
24572
24573
24574
24575
24576
24577
24578
24579
24580
24581
24582
24583
24584
24585
24586
24587
24588
24589
24590
24591
24592
24593
24594
24595
24596
24597
24598
24599
24600
24601
24602
24603
24604
24605
24606
24607
24608
24609
24610
24611
24612
24613
24614
24615
24616
24617
24618
24619
24620
24621
24622
24623
24624
24625
24626
24627
24628
24629
24630
24631
24632
24633
24634
24635
24636
24637
24638
24639
24640
24641
24642
24643
24644
24645
24646
24647
24648
24649
24650
24651
24652
24653
24654
24655
24656
24657
24658
24659
24660
24661
24662
24663
24664
24665
24666
24667
24668
24669
24670
24671
24672
24673
24674
24675
24676
24677
24678
24679
24680
24681
24682
24683
24684
24685
24686
24687
24688
24689
24690
24691
24692
24693
24694
24695
24696
24697
24698
24699
24700
24701
24702
24703
24704
24705
24706
24707
24708
24709
24710
24711
24712
24713
24714
24715
24716
24717
24718
24719
24720
24721
24722
24723
24724
24725
24726
24727
24728
24729
24730
24731
24732
24733
24734
24735
24736
24737
24738
24739
24740
24741
24742
24743
24744
24745
24746
24747
24748
24749
24750
24751
24752
24753
24754
24755
24756
24757
24758
24759
24760
24761
24762
24763
24764
24765
24766
24767
24768
24769
24770
24771
24772
24773
24774
24775
24776
24777
24778
24779
24780
24781
24782
24783
24784
24785
24786
24787
24788
24789
24790
24791
24792
24793
24794
24795
24796
24797
24798
24799
24800
24801
24802
24803
24804
24805
24806
24807
24808
24809
24810
24811
24812
24813
24814
24815
24816
24817
24818
24819
24820
24821
24822
24823
24824
24825
24826
24827
24828
24829
24830
24831
24832
24833
24834
24835
24836
24837
24838
24839
24840
24841
24842
24843
24844
24845
24846
24847
24848
24849
24850
24851
24852
24853
24854
24855
24856
24857
24858
24859
24860
24861
24862
24863
24864
24865
24866
24867
24868
24869
24870
24871
24872
24873
24874
24875
24876
24877
24878
24879
24880
24881
24882
24883
24884
24885
24886
24887
24888
24889
24890
24891
24892
24893
24894
24895
24896
24897
24898
24899
24900
24901
24902
24903
24904
24905
24906
24907
24908
24909
24910
24911
24912
24913
24914
24915
24916
24917
24918
24919
24920
24921
24922
24923
24924
24925
24926
24927
24928
24929
24930
24931
24932
24933
24934
24935
24936
24937
24938
24939
24940
24941
24942
24943
24944
24945
24946
24947
24948
24949
24950
24951
24952
24953
24954
24955
24956
24957
24958
24959
24960
24961
24962
24963
24964
24965
24966
24967
24968
24969
24970
24971
24972
24973
24974
24975
24976
24977
24978
24979
24980
24981
24982
24983
24984
24985
24986
24987
24988
24989
24990
24991
24992
24993
24994
24995
24996
24997
24998
24999
25000
25001
25002
25003
25004
25005
25006
25007
25008
25009
25010
25011
25012
25013
25014
25015
25016
25017
25018
25019
25020
25021
25022
25023
25024
25025
25026
25027
25028
25029
25030
25031
25032
25033
25034
25035
25036
25037
25038
25039
25040
25041
25042
25043
25044
25045
25046
25047
25048
25049
25050
25051
25052
25053
25054
25055
25056
25057
25058
25059
25060
25061
25062
25063
25064
25065
25066
25067
25068
25069
25070
25071
25072
25073
25074
25075
25076
25077
25078
25079
25080
25081
25082
25083
25084
25085
25086
25087
25088
25089
25090
25091
25092
25093
25094
25095
25096
25097
25098
25099
25100
25101
25102
25103
25104
25105
25106
25107
25108
25109
25110
25111
25112
25113
25114
25115
25116
25117
25118
25119
25120
25121
25122
25123
25124
25125
25126
25127
25128
25129
25130
25131
25132
25133
25134
25135
25136
25137
25138
25139
25140
25141
25142
25143
25144
25145
25146
25147
25148
25149
25150
25151
25152
25153
25154
25155
25156
25157
25158
25159
25160
25161
25162
25163
25164
25165
25166
25167
25168
25169
25170
25171
25172
25173
25174
25175
25176
25177
25178
25179
25180
25181
25182
25183
25184
25185
25186
25187
25188
25189
25190
25191
25192
25193
25194
25195
25196
25197
25198
25199
25200
25201
25202
25203
25204
25205
25206
25207
25208
25209
25210
25211
25212
25213
25214
25215
25216
25217
25218
25219
25220
25221
25222
25223
25224
25225
25226
25227
25228
25229
25230
25231
25232
25233
25234
25235
25236
25237
25238
25239
25240
25241
25242
25243
25244
25245
25246
25247
25248
25249
25250
25251
25252
25253
25254
25255
25256
25257
25258
25259
25260
25261
25262
25263
25264
25265
25266
25267
25268
25269
25270
25271
25272
25273
25274
25275
25276
25277
25278
25279
25280
25281
25282
25283
25284
25285
25286
25287
25288
25289
25290
25291
25292
25293
25294
25295
25296
25297
25298
25299
25300
25301
25302
25303
25304
25305
25306
25307
25308
25309
25310
25311
25312
25313
25314
25315
25316
25317
25318
25319
25320
25321
25322
25323
25324
25325
25326
25327
25328
25329
25330
25331
25332
25333
25334
25335
25336
25337
25338
25339
25340
25341
25342
25343
25344
25345
25346
25347
25348
25349
25350
25351
25352
25353
25354
25355
25356
25357
25358
25359
25360
25361
25362
25363
25364
25365
25366
25367
25368
25369
25370
25371
25372
25373
25374
25375
25376
25377
25378
25379
25380
25381
25382
25383
25384
25385
25386
25387
25388
25389
25390
25391
25392
25393
25394
25395
25396
25397
25398
25399
25400
25401
25402
25403
25404
25405
25406
25407
25408
25409
25410
25411
25412
25413
25414
25415
25416
25417
25418
25419
25420
25421
25422
25423
25424
25425
25426
25427
25428
25429
25430
25431
25432
25433
25434
25435
25436
25437
25438
25439
25440
25441
25442
25443
25444
25445
25446
25447
25448
25449
25450
25451
25452
25453
25454
25455
25456
25457
25458
25459
25460
25461
25462
25463
25464
25465
25466
25467
25468
25469
25470
25471
25472
25473
25474
25475
25476
25477
25478
25479
25480
25481
25482
25483
25484
25485
25486
25487
25488
25489
25490
25491
25492
25493
25494
25495
25496
25497
25498
25499
25500
25501
25502
25503
25504
25505
25506
25507
25508
25509
25510
25511
25512
25513
25514
25515
25516
25517
25518
25519
25520
25521
25522
25523
25524
25525
25526
25527
25528
25529
25530
25531
25532
25533
25534
25535
25536
25537
25538
25539
25540
25541
25542
25543
25544
25545
25546
25547
25548
25549
25550
25551
25552
25553
25554
25555
25556
25557
25558
25559
25560
25561
25562
25563
25564
25565
25566
25567
25568
25569
25570
25571
25572
25573
25574
25575
25576
25577
25578
25579
25580
25581
25582
25583
25584
25585
25586
25587
25588
25589
25590
25591
25592
25593
25594
25595
25596
25597
25598
25599
25600
25601
25602
25603
25604
25605
25606
25607
25608
25609
25610
25611
25612
25613
25614
25615
25616
25617
25618
25619
25620
25621
25622
25623
25624
25625
25626
25627
25628
25629
25630
25631
25632
25633
25634
25635
25636
25637
25638
25639
25640
25641
25642
25643
25644
25645
25646
25647
25648
25649
25650
25651
25652
25653
25654
25655
25656
25657
25658
25659
25660
25661
25662
25663
25664
25665
25666
25667
25668
25669
25670
25671
25672
25673
25674
25675
25676
25677
25678
25679
25680
25681
25682
25683
25684
25685
25686
25687
25688
25689
25690
25691
25692
25693
25694
25695
25696
25697
25698
25699
25700
25701
25702
25703
25704
25705
25706
25707
25708
25709
25710
25711
25712
25713
25714
25715
25716
25717
25718
25719
25720
25721
25722
25723
25724
25725
25726
25727
25728
25729
25730
25731
25732
25733
25734
25735
25736
25737
25738
25739
25740
25741
25742
25743
25744
25745
25746
25747
25748
25749
25750
25751
25752
25753
25754
25755
25756
25757
25758
25759
25760
25761
25762
25763
25764
25765
25766
25767
25768
25769
25770
25771
25772
25773
25774
25775
25776
25777
25778
25779
25780
25781
25782
25783
25784
25785
25786
25787
25788
25789
25790
25791
25792
25793
25794
25795
25796
25797
25798
25799
25800
25801
25802
25803
25804
25805
25806
25807
25808
25809
25810
25811
25812
25813
25814
25815
25816
25817
25818
25819
25820
25821
25822
25823
25824
25825
25826
25827
25828
25829
25830
25831
25832
25833
25834
25835
25836
25837
25838
25839
25840
25841
25842
25843
25844
25845
25846
25847
25848
25849
25850
25851
25852
25853
25854
25855
25856
25857
25858
25859
25860
25861
25862
25863
25864
25865
25866
25867
25868
25869
25870
25871
25872
25873
25874
25875
25876
25877
25878
25879
25880
25881
25882
25883
25884
25885
25886
25887
25888
25889
25890
25891
25892
25893
25894
25895
25896
25897
25898
25899
25900
25901
25902
25903
25904
25905
25906
25907
25908
25909
25910
25911
25912
25913
25914
25915
25916
25917
25918
25919
25920
25921
25922
25923
25924
25925
25926
25927
25928
25929
25930
25931
25932
25933
25934
25935
25936
25937
25938
25939
25940
25941
25942
25943
25944
25945
25946
25947
25948
25949
25950
25951
25952
25953
25954
25955
25956
25957
25958
25959
25960
25961
25962
25963
25964
25965
25966
25967
25968
25969
25970
25971
25972
25973
25974
25975
25976
25977
25978
25979
25980
25981
25982
25983
25984
25985
25986
25987
25988
25989
25990
25991
25992
25993
25994
25995
25996
25997
25998
25999
26000
26001
26002
26003
26004
26005
26006
26007
26008
26009
26010
26011
26012
26013
26014
26015
26016
26017
26018
26019
26020
26021
26022
26023
26024
26025
26026
26027
26028
26029
26030
26031
26032
26033
26034
26035
26036
26037
26038
26039
26040
26041
26042
26043
26044
26045
26046
26047
26048
26049
26050
26051
26052
26053
26054
26055
26056
26057
26058
26059
26060
26061
26062
26063
26064
26065
26066
26067
26068
26069
26070
26071
26072
26073
26074
26075
26076
26077
26078
26079
26080
26081
26082
26083
26084
26085
26086
26087
26088
26089
26090
26091
26092
26093
26094
26095
26096
26097
26098
26099
26100
26101
26102
26103
26104
26105
26106
26107
26108
26109
26110
26111
26112
26113
26114
26115
26116
26117
26118
26119
26120
26121
26122
26123
26124
26125
26126
26127
26128
26129
26130
26131
26132
26133
26134
26135
26136
26137
26138
26139
26140
26141
26142
26143
26144
26145
26146
26147
26148
26149
26150
26151
26152
26153
26154
26155
26156
26157
26158
26159
26160
26161
26162
26163
26164
26165
26166
26167
26168
26169
26170
26171
26172
26173
26174
26175
26176
26177
26178
26179
26180
26181
26182
26183
26184
26185
26186
26187
26188
26189
26190
26191
26192
26193
26194
26195
26196
26197
26198
26199
26200
26201
26202
26203
26204
26205
26206
26207
26208
26209
26210
26211
26212
26213
26214
26215
26216
26217
26218
26219
26220
26221
26222
26223
26224
26225
26226
26227
26228
26229
26230
26231
26232
26233
26234
26235
26236
26237
26238
26239
26240
26241
26242
26243
26244
26245
26246
26247
26248
26249
26250
26251
26252
26253
26254
26255
26256
26257
26258
26259
26260
26261
26262
26263
26264
26265
26266
26267
26268
26269
26270
26271
26272
26273
26274
26275
26276
26277
26278
26279
26280
26281
26282
26283
26284
26285
26286
26287
26288
26289
26290
26291
26292
26293
26294
26295
26296
26297
26298
26299
26300
26301
26302
26303
26304
26305
26306
26307
26308
26309
26310
26311
26312
26313
26314
26315
26316
26317
26318
26319
26320
26321
26322
26323
26324
26325
26326
26327
26328
26329
26330
26331
26332
26333
26334
26335
26336
26337
26338
26339
26340
26341
26342
26343
26344
26345
26346
26347
26348
26349
26350
26351
26352
26353
26354
26355
26356
26357
26358
26359
26360
26361
26362
26363
26364
26365
26366
26367
26368
26369
26370
26371
26372
26373
26374
26375
26376
26377
26378
26379
26380
26381
26382
26383
26384
26385
26386
26387
26388
26389
26390
26391
26392
26393
26394
26395
26396
26397
26398
26399
26400
26401
26402
26403
26404
26405
26406
26407
26408
26409
26410
26411
26412
26413
26414
26415
26416
26417
26418
26419
26420
26421
26422
26423
26424
26425
26426
26427
26428
26429
26430
26431
26432
26433
26434
26435
26436
26437
26438
26439
26440
26441
26442
26443
26444
26445
26446
26447
26448
26449
26450
26451
26452
26453
26454
26455
26456
26457
26458
26459
26460
26461
26462
26463
26464
26465
26466
26467
26468
26469
26470
26471
26472
26473
26474
26475
26476
26477
26478
26479
26480
26481
26482
26483
26484
26485
26486
26487
26488
26489
26490
26491
26492
26493
26494
26495
26496
26497
26498
26499
26500
26501
26502
26503
26504
26505
26506
26507
26508
26509
26510
26511
26512
26513
26514
26515
26516
26517
26518
26519
26520
26521
26522
26523
26524
26525
26526
26527
26528
26529
26530
26531
26532
26533
26534
26535
26536
26537
26538
26539
26540
26541
26542
26543
26544
26545
26546
26547
26548
26549
26550
26551
26552
26553
26554
26555
26556
26557
26558
26559
26560
26561
26562
26563
26564
26565
26566
26567
26568
26569
26570
26571
26572
26573
26574
26575
26576
26577
26578
26579
26580
26581
26582
26583
26584
26585
26586
26587
26588
26589
26590
26591
26592
26593
26594
26595
26596
26597
26598
26599
26600
26601
26602
26603
26604
26605
26606
26607
26608
26609
26610
26611
26612
26613
26614
26615
26616
26617
26618
26619
26620
26621
26622
26623
26624
26625
26626
26627
26628
26629
26630
26631
26632
26633
26634
26635
26636
26637
26638
26639
26640
26641
26642
26643
26644
26645
26646
26647
26648
26649
26650
26651
26652
26653
26654
26655
26656
26657
26658
26659
26660
26661
26662
26663
26664
26665
26666
26667
26668
26669
26670
26671
26672
26673
26674
26675
26676
26677
26678
26679
26680
26681
26682
26683
26684
26685
26686
26687
26688
26689
26690
26691
26692
26693
26694
26695
26696
26697
26698
26699
26700
26701
26702
26703
26704
26705
26706
26707
26708
26709
26710
26711
26712
26713
26714
26715
26716
26717
26718
26719
26720
26721
26722
26723
26724
26725
26726
26727
26728
26729
26730
26731
26732
26733
26734
26735
26736
26737
26738
26739
26740
26741
26742
26743
26744
26745
26746
26747
26748
26749
26750
26751
26752
26753
26754
26755
26756
26757
26758
26759
26760
26761
26762
26763
26764
26765
26766
26767
26768
26769
26770
26771
26772
26773
26774
26775
26776
26777
26778
26779
26780
26781
26782
26783
26784
26785
26786
26787
26788
26789
26790
26791
26792
26793
26794
26795
26796
26797
26798
26799
26800
26801
26802
26803
26804
26805
26806
26807
26808
26809
26810
26811
26812
26813
26814
26815
26816
26817
26818
26819
26820
26821
26822
26823
26824
26825
26826
26827
26828
26829
26830
26831
26832
26833
26834
26835
26836
26837
26838
26839
26840
26841
26842
26843
26844
26845
26846
26847
26848
26849
26850
26851
26852
26853
26854
26855
26856
26857
26858
26859
26860
26861
26862
26863
26864
26865
26866
26867
26868
26869
26870
26871
26872
26873
26874
26875
26876
26877
26878
26879
26880
26881
26882
26883
26884
26885
26886
26887
26888
26889
26890
26891
26892
26893
26894
26895
26896
26897
26898
26899
26900
26901
26902
26903
26904
26905
26906
26907
26908
26909
26910
26911
26912
26913
26914
26915
26916
26917
26918
26919
26920
26921
26922
26923
26924
26925
26926
26927
26928
26929
26930
26931
26932
26933
26934
26935
26936
26937
26938
26939
26940
26941
26942
26943
26944
26945
26946
26947
26948
26949
26950
26951
26952
26953
26954
26955
26956
26957
26958
26959
26960
26961
26962
26963
26964
26965
26966
26967
26968
26969
26970
26971
26972
26973
26974
26975
26976
26977
26978
26979
26980
26981
26982
26983
26984
26985
26986
26987
26988
26989
26990
26991
26992
26993
26994
26995
26996
26997
26998
26999
27000
27001
27002
27003
27004
27005
27006
27007
27008
27009
27010
27011
27012
27013
27014
27015
27016
27017
27018
27019
27020
27021
27022
27023
27024
27025
27026
27027
27028
27029
27030
27031
27032
27033
27034
27035
27036
27037
27038
27039
27040
27041
27042
27043
27044
27045
27046
27047
27048
27049
27050
27051
27052
27053
27054
27055
27056
27057
27058
27059
27060
27061
27062
27063
27064
27065
27066
27067
27068
27069
27070
27071
27072
27073
27074
27075
27076
27077
27078
27079
27080
27081
27082
27083
27084
27085
27086
27087
27088
27089
27090
27091
27092
27093
27094
27095
27096
27097
27098
27099
27100
27101
27102
27103
27104
27105
27106
27107
27108
27109
27110
27111
27112
27113
27114
27115
27116
27117
27118
27119
27120
27121
27122
27123
27124
27125
27126
27127
27128
27129
27130
27131
27132
27133
27134
27135
27136
27137
27138
27139
27140
27141
27142
27143
27144
27145
27146
27147
27148
27149
27150
27151
27152
27153
27154
27155
27156
27157
27158
27159
27160
27161
27162
27163
27164
27165
27166
27167
27168
27169
27170
27171
27172
27173
27174
27175
27176
27177
27178
27179
27180
27181
27182
27183
27184
27185
27186
27187
27188
27189
27190
27191
27192
27193
27194
27195
27196
27197
27198
27199
27200
27201
27202
27203
27204
27205
27206
27207
27208
27209
27210
27211
27212
27213
27214
27215
27216
27217
27218
27219
27220
27221
27222
27223
27224
27225
27226
27227
27228
27229
27230
27231
27232
27233
27234
27235
27236
27237
27238
27239
27240
27241
27242
27243
27244
27245
27246
27247
27248
27249
27250
27251
27252
27253
27254
27255
27256
27257
27258
27259
27260
27261
27262
27263
27264
27265
27266
27267
27268
27269
27270
27271
27272
27273
27274
27275
27276
27277
27278
27279
27280
27281
27282
27283
27284
27285
27286
27287
27288
27289
27290
27291
27292
27293
27294
27295
27296
27297
27298
27299
27300
27301
27302
27303
27304
27305
27306
27307
27308
27309
27310
27311
27312
27313
27314
27315
27316
27317
27318
27319
27320
27321
27322
27323
27324
27325
27326
27327
27328
27329
27330
27331
27332
27333
27334
27335
27336
27337
27338
27339
27340
27341
27342
27343
27344
27345
27346
27347
27348
27349
27350
27351
27352
27353
27354
27355
27356
27357
27358
27359
27360
27361
27362
27363
27364
27365
27366
27367
27368
27369
27370
27371
27372
27373
27374
27375
27376
27377
27378
27379
27380
27381
27382
27383
27384
27385
27386
27387
27388
27389
27390
27391
27392
27393
27394
27395
27396
27397
27398
27399
27400
27401
27402
27403
27404
27405
27406
27407
27408
27409
27410
27411
27412
27413
27414
27415
27416
27417
27418
27419
27420
27421
27422
27423
27424
27425
27426
27427
27428
27429
27430
27431
27432
27433
27434
27435
27436
27437
27438
27439
27440
27441
27442
27443
27444
27445
27446
27447
27448
27449
27450
27451
27452
27453
27454
27455
27456
27457
27458
27459
27460
27461
27462
27463
27464
27465
27466
27467
27468
27469
27470
27471
27472
27473
27474
27475
27476
27477
27478
27479
27480
27481
27482
27483
27484
27485
27486
27487
27488
27489
27490
27491
27492
27493
27494
27495
27496
27497
27498
27499
27500
27501
27502
27503
27504
27505
27506
27507
27508
27509
27510
27511
27512
27513
27514
27515
27516
27517
27518
27519
27520
27521
27522
27523
27524
27525
27526
27527
27528
27529
27530
27531
27532
27533
27534
27535
27536
27537
27538
27539
27540
27541
27542
27543
27544
27545
27546
27547
27548
27549
27550
27551
27552
27553
27554
27555
27556
27557
27558
27559
27560
27561
27562
27563
27564
27565
27566
27567
27568
27569
27570
27571
27572
27573
27574
27575
27576
27577
27578
27579
27580
27581
27582
27583
27584
27585
27586
27587
27588
27589
27590
27591
27592
27593
27594
27595
27596
27597
27598
27599
27600
27601
27602
27603
27604
27605
27606
27607
27608
27609
27610
27611
27612
27613
27614
27615
27616
27617
27618
27619
27620
27621
27622
27623
27624
27625
27626
27627
27628
27629
27630
27631
27632
27633
27634
27635
27636
27637
27638
27639
27640
27641
27642
27643
27644
27645
27646
27647
27648
27649
27650
27651
27652
27653
27654
27655
27656
27657
27658
27659
27660
27661
27662
27663
27664
27665
27666
27667
27668
27669
27670
27671
27672
27673
27674
27675
27676
27677
27678
27679
27680
27681
27682
27683
27684
27685
27686
27687
27688
27689
27690
27691
27692
27693
27694
27695
27696
27697
27698
27699
27700
27701
27702
27703
27704
27705
27706
27707
27708
27709
27710
27711
27712
27713
27714
27715
27716
27717
27718
27719
27720
27721
27722
27723
27724
27725
27726
27727
27728
27729
27730
27731
27732
27733
27734
27735
27736
27737
27738
27739
27740
27741
27742
27743
27744
27745
27746
27747
27748
27749
27750
27751
27752
27753
27754
27755
27756
27757
27758
27759
27760
27761
27762
27763
27764
27765
27766
27767
27768
27769
27770
27771
27772
27773
27774
27775
27776
27777
27778
27779
27780
27781
27782
27783
27784
27785
27786
27787
27788
27789
27790
27791
27792
27793
27794
27795
27796
27797
27798
27799
27800
27801
27802
27803
27804
27805
27806
27807
27808
27809
27810
27811
27812
27813
27814
27815
27816
27817
27818
27819
27820
27821
27822
27823
27824
27825
27826
27827
27828
27829
27830
27831
27832
27833
27834
27835
27836
27837
27838
27839
27840
27841
27842
27843
27844
27845
27846
27847
27848
27849
27850
27851
27852
27853
27854
27855
27856
27857
27858
27859
27860
27861
27862
27863
27864
27865
27866
27867
27868
27869
27870
27871
27872
27873
27874
27875
27876
27877
27878
27879
27880
27881
27882
27883
27884
27885
27886
27887
27888
27889
27890
27891
27892
27893
27894
27895
27896
27897
27898
27899
27900
27901
27902
27903
27904
27905
27906
27907
27908
27909
27910
27911
27912
27913
27914
27915
27916
27917
27918
27919
27920
27921
27922
27923
27924
27925
27926
27927
27928
27929
27930
27931
27932
27933
27934
27935
27936
27937
27938
27939
27940
27941
27942
27943
27944
27945
27946
27947
27948
27949
27950
27951
27952
27953
27954
27955
27956
27957
27958
27959
27960
27961
27962
27963
27964
27965
27966
27967
27968
27969
27970
27971
27972
27973
27974
27975
27976
27977
27978
27979
27980
27981
27982
27983
27984
27985
27986
27987
27988
27989
27990
27991
27992
27993
27994
27995
27996
27997
27998
27999
28000
28001
28002
28003
28004
28005
28006
28007
28008
28009
28010
28011
28012
28013
28014
28015
28016
28017
28018
28019
28020
28021
28022
28023
28024
28025
28026
28027
28028
28029
28030
28031
28032
28033
28034
28035
28036
28037
28038
28039
28040
28041
28042
28043
28044
28045
28046
28047
28048
28049
28050
28051
28052
28053
28054
28055
28056
28057
28058
28059
28060
28061
28062
28063
28064
28065
28066
28067
28068
28069
28070
28071
28072
28073
28074
28075
28076
28077
28078
28079
28080
28081
28082
28083
28084
28085
28086
28087
28088
28089
28090
28091
28092
28093
28094
28095
28096
28097
28098
28099
28100
28101
28102
28103
28104
28105
28106
28107
28108
28109
28110
28111
28112
28113
28114
28115
28116
28117
28118
28119
28120
28121
28122
28123
28124
28125
28126
28127
28128
28129
28130
28131
28132
28133
28134
28135
28136
28137
28138
28139
28140
28141
28142
28143
28144
28145
28146
28147
28148
28149
28150
28151
28152
28153
28154
28155
28156
28157
28158
28159
28160
28161
28162
28163
28164
28165
28166
28167
28168
28169
28170
28171
28172
28173
28174
28175
28176
28177
28178
28179
28180
28181
28182
28183
28184
28185
28186
28187
28188
28189
28190
28191
28192
28193
28194
28195
28196
28197
28198
28199
28200
28201
28202
28203
28204
28205
28206
28207
28208
28209
28210
28211
28212
28213
28214
28215
28216
28217
28218
28219
28220
28221
28222
28223
28224
28225
28226
28227
28228
28229
28230
28231
28232
28233
28234
28235
28236
28237
28238
28239
28240
28241
28242
28243
28244
28245
28246
28247
28248
28249
28250
28251
28252
28253
28254
28255
28256
28257
28258
28259
28260
28261
28262
28263
28264
28265
28266
28267
28268
28269
28270
28271
28272
28273
28274
28275
28276
28277
28278
28279
28280
28281
28282
28283
28284
28285
28286
28287
28288
28289
28290
28291
28292
28293
28294
28295
28296
28297
28298
28299
28300
28301
28302
28303
28304
28305
28306
28307
28308
28309
28310
28311
28312
28313
28314
28315
28316
28317
28318
28319
28320
28321
28322
28323
28324
28325
28326
28327
28328
28329
28330
28331
28332
28333
28334
28335
28336
28337
28338
28339
28340
28341
28342
28343
28344
28345
28346
28347
28348
28349
28350
28351
28352
28353
28354
28355
28356
28357
28358
28359
28360
28361
28362
28363
28364
28365
28366
28367
28368
28369
28370
28371
28372
28373
28374
28375
28376
28377
28378
28379
28380
28381
28382
28383
28384
28385
28386
28387
28388
28389
28390
28391
28392
28393
28394
28395
28396
28397
28398
28399
28400
28401
28402
28403
28404
28405
28406
28407
28408
28409
28410
28411
28412
28413
28414
28415
28416
28417
28418
28419
28420
28421
28422
28423
28424
28425
28426
28427
28428
28429
28430
28431
28432
28433
28434
28435
28436
28437
28438
28439
28440
28441
28442
28443
28444
28445
28446
28447
28448
28449
28450
28451
28452
28453
28454
28455
28456
28457
28458
28459
28460
28461
28462
28463
28464
28465
28466
28467
28468
28469
28470
28471
28472
28473
28474
28475
28476
28477
28478
28479
28480
28481
28482
28483
28484
28485
28486
28487
28488
28489
28490
28491
28492
28493
28494
28495
28496
28497
28498
28499
28500
28501
28502
28503
28504
28505
28506
28507
28508
28509
28510
28511
28512
28513
28514
28515
28516
28517
28518
28519
28520
28521
28522
28523
28524
28525
28526
28527
28528
28529
28530
28531
28532
28533
28534
28535
28536
28537
28538
28539
28540
28541
28542
28543
28544
28545
28546
28547
28548
28549
28550
28551
28552
28553
28554
28555
28556
28557
28558
28559
28560
28561
28562
28563
28564
28565
28566
28567
28568
28569
28570
28571
28572
28573
28574
28575
28576
28577
28578
28579
28580
28581
28582
28583
28584
28585
28586
28587
28588
28589
28590
28591
28592
28593
28594
28595
28596
28597
28598
28599
28600
28601
28602
28603
28604
28605
28606
28607
28608
28609
28610
28611
28612
28613
28614
28615
28616
28617
28618
28619
28620
28621
28622
28623
28624
28625
28626
28627
28628
28629
28630
28631
28632
28633
28634
28635
28636
28637
28638
28639
28640
28641
28642
28643
28644
28645
28646
28647
28648
28649
28650
28651
28652
28653
28654
28655
28656
28657
28658
28659
28660
28661
28662
28663
28664
28665
28666
28667
28668
28669
28670
28671
28672
28673
28674
28675
28676
28677
28678
28679
28680
28681
28682
28683
28684
28685
28686
28687
28688
28689
28690
28691
28692
28693
28694
28695
28696
28697
28698
28699
28700
28701
28702
28703
28704
28705
28706
28707
28708
28709
28710
28711
28712
28713
28714
28715
28716
28717
28718
28719
28720
28721
28722
28723
28724
28725
28726
28727
28728
28729
28730
28731
28732
28733
28734
28735
28736
28737
28738
28739
28740
28741
28742
28743
28744
28745
28746
28747
28748
28749
28750
28751
28752
28753
28754
28755
28756
28757
28758
28759
28760
28761
28762
28763
28764
28765
28766
28767
28768
28769
28770
28771
28772
28773
28774
28775
28776
28777
28778
28779
28780
28781
28782
28783
28784
28785
28786
28787
28788
28789
28790
28791
28792
28793
28794
28795
28796
28797
28798
28799
28800
28801
28802
28803
28804
28805
28806
28807
28808
28809
28810
28811
28812
28813
28814
28815
28816
28817
28818
28819
28820
28821
28822
28823
28824
28825
28826
28827
28828
28829
28830
28831
28832
28833
28834
28835
28836
28837
28838
28839
28840
28841
28842
28843
28844
28845
28846
28847
28848
28849
28850
28851
28852
28853
28854
28855
28856
28857
28858
28859
28860
28861
28862
28863
28864
28865
28866
28867
28868
28869
28870
28871
28872
28873
28874
28875
28876
28877
28878
28879
28880
28881
28882
28883
28884
28885
28886
28887
28888
28889
28890
28891
28892
28893
28894
28895
28896
28897
28898
28899
28900
28901
28902
28903
28904
28905
28906
28907
28908
28909
28910
28911
28912
28913
28914
28915
28916
28917
28918
28919
28920
28921
28922
28923
28924
28925
28926
28927
28928
28929
28930
28931
28932
28933
28934
28935
28936
28937
28938
28939
28940
28941
28942
28943
28944
28945
28946
28947
28948
28949
28950
28951
28952
28953
28954
28955
28956
28957
28958
28959
28960
28961
28962
28963
28964
28965
28966
28967
28968
28969
28970
28971
28972
28973
28974
28975
28976
28977
28978
28979
28980
28981
28982
28983
28984
28985
28986
28987
28988
28989
28990
28991
28992
28993
28994
28995
28996
28997
28998
28999
29000
29001
29002
29003
29004
29005
29006
29007
29008
29009
29010
29011
29012
29013
29014
29015
29016
29017
29018
29019
29020
29021
29022
29023
29024
29025
29026
29027
29028
29029
29030
29031
29032
29033
29034
29035
29036
29037
29038
29039
29040
29041
29042
29043
29044
29045
29046
29047
29048
29049
29050
29051
29052
29053
29054
29055
29056
29057
29058
29059
29060
29061
29062
29063
29064
29065
29066
29067
29068
29069
29070
29071
29072
29073
29074
29075
29076
29077
29078
29079
29080
29081
29082
29083
29084
29085
29086
29087
29088
29089
29090
29091
29092
29093
29094
29095
29096
29097
29098
29099
29100
29101
29102
29103
29104
29105
29106
29107
29108
29109
29110
29111
29112
29113
29114
29115
29116
29117
29118
29119
29120
29121
29122
29123
29124
29125
29126
29127
29128
29129
29130
29131
29132
29133
29134
29135
29136
29137
29138
29139
29140
29141
29142
29143
29144
29145
29146
29147
29148
29149
29150
29151
29152
29153
29154
29155
29156
29157
29158
29159
29160
29161
29162
29163
29164
29165
29166
29167
29168
29169
29170
29171
29172
29173
29174
29175
29176
29177
29178
29179
29180
29181
29182
29183
29184
29185
29186
29187
29188
29189
29190
29191
29192
29193
29194
29195
29196
29197
29198
29199
29200
29201
29202
29203
29204
29205
29206
29207
29208
29209
29210
29211
29212
29213
29214
29215
29216
29217
29218
29219
29220
29221
29222
29223
29224
29225
29226
29227
29228
29229
29230
29231
29232
29233
29234
29235
29236
29237
29238
29239
29240
29241
29242
29243
29244
29245
29246
29247
29248
29249
29250
29251
29252
29253
29254
29255
29256
29257
29258
29259
29260
29261
29262
29263
29264
29265
29266
29267
29268
29269
29270
29271
29272
29273
29274
29275
29276
29277
29278
29279
29280
29281
29282
29283
29284
29285
29286
29287
29288
29289
29290
29291
29292
29293
29294
29295
29296
29297
29298
29299
29300
29301
29302
29303
29304
29305
29306
29307
29308
29309
29310
29311
29312
29313
29314
29315
29316
29317
29318
29319
29320
29321
29322
29323
29324
29325
29326
29327
29328
29329
29330
29331
29332
29333
29334
29335
29336
29337
29338
29339
29340
29341
29342
29343
29344
29345
29346
29347
29348
29349
29350
29351
29352
29353
29354
29355
29356
29357
29358
29359
29360
29361
29362
29363
29364
29365
29366
29367
29368
29369
29370
29371
29372
29373
29374
29375
29376
29377
29378
29379
29380
29381
29382
29383
29384
29385
29386
29387
29388
29389
29390
29391
29392
29393
29394
29395
29396
29397
29398
29399
29400
29401
29402
29403
29404
29405
29406
29407
29408
29409
29410
29411
29412
29413
29414
29415
29416
29417
29418
29419
29420
29421
29422
29423
29424
29425
29426
29427
29428
29429
29430
29431
29432
29433
29434
29435
29436
29437
29438
29439
29440
29441
29442
29443
29444
29445
29446
29447
29448
29449
29450
29451
29452
29453
29454
29455
29456
29457
29458
29459
29460
29461
29462
29463
29464
29465
29466
29467
29468
29469
29470
29471
29472
29473
29474
29475
29476
29477
29478
29479
29480
29481
29482
29483
29484
29485
29486
29487
29488
29489
29490
29491
29492
29493
29494
29495
29496
29497
29498
29499
29500
29501
29502
29503
29504
29505
29506
29507
29508
29509
29510
29511
29512
29513
29514
29515
29516
29517
29518
29519
29520
29521
29522
29523
29524
29525
29526
29527
29528
29529
29530
29531
29532
29533
29534
29535
29536
29537
29538
29539
29540
29541
29542
29543
29544
29545
29546
29547
29548
29549
29550
29551
29552
29553
29554
29555
29556
29557
29558
29559
29560
29561
29562
29563
29564
29565
29566
29567
29568
29569
29570
29571
29572
29573
29574
29575
29576
29577
29578
29579
29580
29581
29582
29583
29584
29585
29586
29587
29588
29589
29590
29591
29592
29593
29594
29595
29596
29597
29598
29599
29600
29601
29602
29603
29604
29605
29606
29607
29608
29609
29610
29611
29612
29613
29614
29615
29616
29617
29618
29619
29620
29621
29622
29623
29624
29625
29626
29627
29628
29629
29630
29631
29632
29633
29634
29635
29636
29637
29638
29639
29640
29641
29642
29643
29644
29645
29646
29647
29648
29649
29650
29651
29652
29653
29654
29655
29656
29657
29658
29659
29660
29661
29662
29663
29664
29665
29666
29667
29668
29669
29670
29671
29672
29673
29674
29675
29676
29677
29678
29679
29680
29681
29682
29683
29684
29685
29686
29687
29688
29689
29690
29691
29692
29693
29694
29695
29696
29697
29698
29699
29700
29701
29702
29703
29704
29705
29706
29707
29708
29709
29710
29711
29712
29713
29714
29715
29716
29717
29718
29719
29720
29721
29722
29723
29724
29725
29726
29727
29728
29729
29730
29731
29732
29733
29734
29735
29736
29737
29738
29739
29740
29741
29742
29743
29744
29745
29746
29747
29748
29749
29750
29751
29752
29753
29754
29755
29756
29757
29758
29759
29760
29761
29762
29763
29764
29765
29766
29767
29768
29769
29770
29771
29772
29773
29774
29775
29776
29777
29778
29779
29780
29781
29782
29783
29784
29785
29786
29787
29788
29789
29790
29791
29792
29793
29794
29795
29796
29797
29798
29799
29800
29801
29802
29803
29804
29805
29806
29807
29808
29809
29810
29811
29812
29813
29814
29815
29816
29817
29818
29819
29820
29821
29822
29823
29824
29825
29826
29827
29828
29829
29830
29831
29832
29833
29834
29835
29836
29837
29838
29839
29840
29841
29842
29843
29844
29845
29846
29847
29848
29849
29850
29851
29852
29853
29854
29855
29856
29857
29858
29859
29860
29861
29862
29863
29864
29865
29866
29867
29868
29869
29870
29871
29872
29873
29874
29875
29876
29877
29878
29879
29880
29881
29882
29883
29884
29885
29886
29887
29888
29889
29890
29891
29892
29893
29894
29895
29896
29897
29898
29899
29900
29901
29902
29903
29904
29905
29906
29907
29908
29909
29910
29911
29912
29913
29914
29915
29916
29917
29918
29919
29920
29921
29922
29923
29924
29925
29926
29927
29928
29929
29930
29931
29932
29933
29934
29935
29936
29937
29938
29939
29940
29941
29942
29943
29944
29945
29946
29947
29948
29949
29950
29951
29952
29953
29954
29955
29956
29957
29958
29959
29960
29961
29962
29963
29964
29965
29966
29967
29968
29969
29970
29971
29972
29973
29974
29975
29976
29977
29978
29979
29980
29981
29982
29983
29984
29985
29986
29987
29988
29989
29990
29991
29992
29993
29994
29995
29996
29997
29998
29999
30000
30001
30002
30003
30004
30005
30006
30007
30008
30009
30010
30011
30012
30013
30014
30015
30016
30017
30018
30019
30020
30021
30022
30023
30024
30025
30026
30027
30028
30029
30030
30031
30032
30033
30034
30035
30036
30037
30038
30039
30040
30041
30042
30043
30044
30045
30046
30047
30048
30049
30050
30051
30052
30053
30054
30055
30056
30057
30058
30059
30060
30061
30062
30063
30064
30065
30066
30067
30068
30069
30070
30071
30072
30073
30074
30075
30076
30077
30078
30079
30080
30081
30082
30083
30084
30085
30086
30087
30088
30089
30090
30091
30092
30093
30094
30095
30096
30097
30098
30099
30100
30101
30102
30103
30104
30105
30106
30107
30108
30109
30110
30111
30112
30113
30114
30115
30116
30117
30118
30119
30120
30121
30122
30123
30124
30125
30126
30127
30128
30129
30130
30131
30132
30133
30134
30135
30136
30137
30138
30139
30140
30141
30142
30143
30144
30145
30146
30147
30148
30149
30150
30151
30152
30153
30154
30155
30156
30157
30158
30159
30160
30161
30162
30163
30164
30165
30166
30167
30168
30169
30170
30171
30172
30173
30174
30175
30176
30177
30178
30179
30180
30181
30182
30183
30184
30185
30186
30187
30188
30189
30190
30191
30192
30193
30194
30195
30196
30197
30198
30199
30200
30201
30202
30203
30204
30205
30206
30207
30208
30209
30210
30211
30212
30213
30214
30215
30216
30217
30218
30219
30220
30221
30222
30223
30224
30225
30226
30227
30228
30229
30230
30231
30232
30233
30234
30235
30236
30237
30238
30239
30240
30241
30242
30243
30244
30245
30246
30247
30248
30249
30250
30251
30252
30253
30254
30255
30256
30257
30258
30259
30260
30261
30262
30263
30264
30265
30266
30267
30268
30269
30270
30271
30272
30273
30274
30275
30276
30277
30278
30279
30280
30281
30282
30283
30284
30285
30286
30287
30288
30289
30290
30291
30292
30293
30294
30295
30296
30297
30298
30299
30300
30301
30302
30303
30304
30305
30306
30307
30308
30309
30310
30311
30312
30313
30314
30315
30316
30317
30318
30319
30320
30321
30322
30323
30324
30325
30326
30327
30328
30329
30330
30331
30332
30333
30334
30335
30336
30337
30338
30339
30340
30341
30342
30343
30344
30345
30346
30347
30348
30349
30350
30351
30352
30353
30354
30355
30356
30357
30358
30359
30360
30361
30362
30363
30364
30365
30366
30367
30368
30369
30370
30371
30372
30373
30374
30375
30376
30377
30378
30379
30380
30381
30382
30383
30384
30385
30386
30387
30388
30389
30390
30391
30392
30393
30394
30395
30396
30397
30398
30399
30400
30401
30402
30403
30404
30405
30406
30407
30408
30409
30410
30411
30412
30413
30414
30415
30416
30417
30418
30419
30420
30421
30422
30423
30424
30425
30426
30427
30428
30429
30430
30431
30432
30433
30434
30435
30436
30437
30438
30439
30440
30441
30442
30443
30444
30445
30446
30447
30448
30449
30450
30451
30452
30453
30454
30455
30456
30457
30458
30459
30460
30461
30462
30463
30464
30465
30466
30467
30468
30469
30470
30471
30472
30473
30474
30475
30476
30477
30478
30479
30480
30481
30482
30483
30484
30485
30486
30487
30488
30489
30490
30491
30492
30493
30494
30495
30496
30497
30498
30499
30500
30501
30502
30503
30504
30505
30506
30507
30508
30509
30510
30511
30512
30513
30514
30515
30516
30517
30518
30519
30520
30521
30522
30523
30524
30525
30526
30527
30528
30529
30530
30531
30532
30533
30534
30535
30536
30537
30538
30539
30540
30541
30542
30543
30544
30545
30546
30547
30548
30549
30550
30551
30552
30553
30554
30555
30556
30557
30558
30559
30560
30561
30562
30563
30564
30565
30566
30567
30568
30569
30570
30571
30572
30573
30574
30575
30576
30577
30578
30579
30580
30581
30582
30583
30584
30585
30586
30587
30588
30589
30590
30591
30592
30593
30594
30595
30596
30597
30598
30599
30600
30601
30602
30603
30604
30605
30606
30607
30608
30609
30610
30611
30612
30613
30614
30615
30616
30617
30618
30619
30620
30621
30622
30623
30624
30625
30626
30627
30628
30629
30630
30631
30632
30633
30634
30635
30636
30637
30638
30639
30640
30641
30642
30643
30644
30645
30646
30647
30648
30649
30650
30651
30652
30653
30654
30655
30656
30657
30658
30659
30660
30661
30662
30663
30664
30665
30666
30667
30668
30669
30670
30671
30672
30673
30674
30675
30676
30677
30678
30679
30680
30681
30682
30683
30684
30685
30686
30687
30688
30689
30690
30691
30692
30693
30694
30695
30696
30697
30698
30699
30700
30701
30702
30703
30704
30705
30706
30707
30708
30709
30710
30711
30712
30713
30714
30715
30716
30717
30718
30719
30720
30721
30722
30723
30724
30725
30726
30727
30728
30729
30730
30731
30732
30733
30734
30735
30736
30737
30738
30739
30740
30741
30742
30743
30744
30745
30746
30747
30748
30749
30750
30751
30752
30753
30754
30755
30756
30757
30758
30759
30760
30761
30762
30763
30764
30765
30766
30767
30768
30769
30770
30771
30772
30773
30774
30775
30776
30777
30778
30779
30780
30781
30782
30783
30784
30785
30786
30787
30788
30789
30790
30791
30792
30793
30794
30795
30796
30797
30798
30799
30800
30801
30802
30803
30804
30805
30806
30807
30808
30809
30810
30811
30812
30813
30814
30815
30816
30817
30818
30819
30820
30821
30822
30823
30824
30825
30826
30827
30828
30829
30830
30831
30832
30833
30834
30835
30836
30837
30838
30839
30840
30841
30842
30843
30844
30845
30846
30847
30848
30849
30850
30851
30852
30853
30854
30855
30856
30857
30858
30859
30860
30861
30862
30863
30864
30865
30866
30867
30868
30869
30870
30871
30872
30873
30874
30875
30876
30877
30878
30879
30880
30881
30882
30883
30884
30885
30886
30887
30888
30889
30890
30891
30892
30893
30894
30895
30896
30897
30898
30899
30900
30901
30902
30903
30904
30905
30906
30907
30908
30909
30910
30911
30912
30913
30914
30915
30916
30917
30918
30919
30920
30921
30922
30923
30924
30925
30926
30927
30928
30929
30930
30931
30932
30933
30934
30935
30936
30937
30938
30939
30940
30941
30942
30943
30944
30945
30946
30947
30948
30949
30950
30951
30952
30953
30954
30955
30956
30957
30958
30959
30960
30961
30962
30963
30964
30965
30966
30967
30968
30969
30970
30971
30972
30973
30974
30975
30976
30977
30978
30979
30980
30981
30982
30983
30984
30985
30986
30987
30988
30989
30990
30991
30992
30993
30994
30995
30996
30997
30998
30999
31000
31001
31002
31003
31004
31005
31006
31007
31008
31009
31010
31011
31012
31013
31014
31015
31016
31017
31018
31019
31020
31021
31022
31023
31024
31025
31026
31027
31028
31029
31030
31031
31032
31033
31034
31035
31036
31037
31038
31039
31040
31041
31042
31043
31044
31045
31046
31047
31048
31049
31050
31051
31052
31053
31054
31055
31056
31057
31058
31059
31060
31061
31062
31063
31064
31065
31066
31067
31068
31069
31070
31071
31072
31073
31074
31075
31076
31077
31078
31079
31080
31081
31082
31083
31084
31085
31086
31087
31088
31089
31090
31091
31092
31093
31094
31095
31096
31097
31098
31099
31100
31101
31102
31103
31104
31105
31106
31107
31108
31109
31110
31111
31112
31113
31114
31115
31116
31117
31118
31119
31120
31121
31122
31123
31124
31125
31126
31127
31128
31129
31130
31131
31132
31133
31134
31135
31136
31137
31138
31139
31140
31141
31142
31143
31144
31145
31146
31147
31148
31149
31150
31151
31152
31153
31154
31155
31156
31157
31158
31159
31160
31161
31162
31163
31164
31165
31166
31167
31168
31169
31170
31171
31172
31173
31174
31175
31176
31177
31178
31179
31180
31181
31182
31183
31184
31185
31186
31187
31188
31189
31190
31191
31192
31193
31194
31195
31196
31197
31198
31199
31200
31201
31202
31203
31204
31205
31206
31207
31208
31209
31210
31211
31212
31213
31214
31215
31216
31217
31218
31219
31220
31221
31222
31223
31224
31225
31226
31227
31228
31229
31230
31231
31232
31233
31234
31235
31236
31237
31238
31239
31240
31241
31242
31243
31244
31245
31246
31247
31248
31249
31250
31251
31252
31253
31254
31255
31256
31257
31258
31259
31260
31261
31262
31263
31264
31265
31266
31267
31268
31269
31270
31271
31272
31273
31274
31275
31276
31277
31278
31279
31280
31281
31282
31283
31284
31285
31286
31287
31288
31289
31290
31291
31292
31293
31294
31295
31296
31297
31298
31299
31300
31301
31302
31303
31304
31305
31306
31307
31308
31309
31310
31311
31312
31313
31314
31315
31316
31317
31318
31319
31320
31321
31322
31323
31324
31325
31326
31327
31328
31329
31330
31331
31332
31333
31334
31335
31336
31337
31338
31339
31340
31341
31342
31343
31344
31345
31346
31347
31348
31349
31350
31351
31352
31353
31354
31355
31356
31357
31358
31359
31360
31361
31362
31363
31364
31365
31366
31367
31368
31369
31370
31371
31372
31373
31374
31375
31376
31377
31378
31379
31380
31381
31382
31383
31384
31385
31386
31387
31388
31389
31390
31391
31392
31393
31394
31395
31396
31397
31398
31399
31400
31401
31402
31403
31404
31405
31406
31407
31408
31409
31410
31411
31412
31413
31414
31415
31416
31417
31418
31419
31420
31421
31422
31423
31424
31425
31426
31427
31428
31429
31430
31431
31432
31433
31434
31435
31436
31437
31438
31439
31440
31441
31442
31443
31444
31445
31446
31447
31448
31449
31450
31451
31452
31453
31454
31455
31456
31457
31458
31459
31460
31461
31462
31463
31464
31465
31466
31467
31468
31469
31470
31471
31472
31473
31474
31475
31476
31477
31478
31479
31480
31481
31482
31483
31484
31485
31486
31487
31488
31489
31490
31491
31492
31493
31494
31495
31496
31497
31498
31499
31500
31501
31502
31503
31504
31505
31506
31507
31508
31509
31510
31511
31512
31513
31514
31515
31516
31517
31518
31519
31520
31521
31522
31523
31524
31525
31526
31527
31528
31529
31530
31531
31532
31533
31534
31535
31536
31537
31538
31539
31540
31541
31542
31543
31544
31545
31546
31547
31548
31549
31550
31551
31552
31553
31554
31555
31556
31557
31558
31559
31560
31561
31562
31563
31564
31565
31566
31567
31568
31569
31570
31571
31572
31573
31574
31575
31576
31577
31578
31579
31580
31581
31582
31583
31584
31585
31586
31587
31588
31589
31590
31591
31592
31593
31594
31595
31596
31597
31598
31599
31600
31601
31602
31603
31604
31605
31606
31607
31608
31609
31610
31611
31612
31613
31614
31615
31616
31617
31618
31619
31620
31621
31622
31623
31624
31625
31626
31627
31628
31629
31630
31631
31632
31633
31634
31635
31636
31637
31638
31639
31640
31641
31642
31643
31644
31645
31646
31647
31648
31649
31650
31651
31652
31653
31654
31655
31656
31657
31658
31659
31660
31661
31662
31663
31664
31665
31666
31667
31668
31669
31670
31671
31672
31673
31674
31675
31676
31677
31678
31679
31680
31681
31682
31683
31684
31685
31686
31687
31688
31689
31690
31691
31692
31693
31694
31695
31696
31697
31698
31699
31700
31701
31702
31703
31704
31705
31706
31707
31708
31709
31710
31711
31712
31713
31714
31715
31716
31717
31718
31719
31720
31721
31722
31723
31724
31725
31726
31727
31728
31729
31730
31731
31732
31733
31734
31735
31736
31737
31738
31739
31740
31741
31742
31743
31744
31745
31746
31747
31748
31749
31750
31751
31752
31753
31754
31755
31756
31757
31758
31759
31760
31761
31762
31763
31764
31765
31766
31767
31768
31769
31770
31771
31772
31773
31774
31775
31776
31777
31778
31779
31780
31781
31782
31783
31784
31785
31786
31787
31788
31789
31790
31791
31792
31793
31794
31795
31796
31797
31798
31799
31800
31801
31802
31803
31804
31805
31806
31807
31808
31809
31810
31811
31812
31813
31814
31815
31816
31817
31818
31819
31820
31821
31822
31823
31824
31825
31826
31827
31828
31829
31830
31831
31832
31833
31834
31835
31836
31837
31838
31839
31840
31841
31842
31843
31844
31845
31846
31847
31848
31849
31850
31851
31852
31853
31854
31855
31856
31857
31858
31859
31860
31861
31862
31863
31864
31865
31866
31867
31868
31869
31870
31871
31872
31873
31874
31875
31876
31877
31878
31879
31880
31881
31882
31883
31884
31885
31886
31887
31888
31889
31890
31891
31892
31893
31894
31895
31896
31897
31898
31899
31900
31901
31902
31903
31904
31905
31906
31907
31908
31909
31910
31911
31912
31913
31914
31915
31916
31917
31918
31919
31920
31921
31922
31923
31924
31925
31926
31927
31928
31929
31930
31931
31932
31933
31934
31935
31936
31937
31938
31939
31940
31941
31942
31943
31944
31945
31946
31947
31948
31949
31950
31951
31952
31953
31954
31955
31956
31957
31958
31959
31960
31961
31962
31963
31964
31965
31966
31967
31968
31969
31970
31971
31972
31973
31974
31975
31976
31977
31978
31979
31980
31981
31982
31983
31984
31985
31986
31987
31988
31989
31990
31991
31992
31993
31994
31995
31996
31997
31998
31999
32000
32001
32002
32003
32004
32005
32006
32007
32008
32009
32010
32011
32012
32013
32014
32015
32016
32017
32018
32019
32020
32021
32022
32023
32024
32025
32026
32027
32028
32029
32030
32031
32032
32033
32034
32035
32036
32037
32038
32039
32040
32041
32042
32043
32044
32045
32046
32047
32048
32049
32050
32051
32052
32053
32054
32055
32056
32057
32058
32059
32060
32061
32062
32063
32064
32065
32066
32067
32068
32069
32070
32071
32072
32073
32074
32075
32076
32077
32078
32079
32080
32081
32082
32083
32084
32085
32086
32087
32088
32089
32090
32091
32092
32093
32094
32095
32096
32097
32098
32099
32100
32101
32102
32103
32104
32105
32106
32107
32108
32109
32110
32111
32112
32113
32114
32115
32116
32117
32118
32119
32120
32121
32122
32123
32124
32125
32126
32127
32128
32129
32130
32131
32132
32133
32134
32135
32136
32137
32138
32139
32140
32141
32142
32143
32144
32145
32146
32147
32148
32149
32150
32151
32152
32153
32154
32155
32156
32157
32158
32159
32160
32161
32162
32163
32164
32165
32166
32167
32168
32169
32170
32171
32172
32173
32174
32175
32176
32177
32178
32179
32180
32181
32182
32183
32184
32185
32186
32187
32188
32189
32190
32191
32192
32193
32194
32195
32196
32197
32198
32199
32200
32201
32202
32203
32204
32205
32206
32207
32208
32209
32210
32211
32212
32213
32214
32215
32216
32217
32218
32219
32220
32221
32222
32223
32224
32225
32226
32227
32228
32229
32230
32231
32232
32233
32234
32235
32236
32237
32238
32239
32240
32241
32242
32243
32244
32245
32246
32247
32248
32249
32250
32251
32252
32253
32254
32255
32256
32257
32258
32259
32260
32261
32262
32263
32264
32265
32266
32267
32268
32269
32270
32271
32272
32273
32274
32275
32276
32277
32278
32279
32280
32281
32282
32283
32284
32285
32286
32287
32288
32289
32290
32291
32292
32293
32294
32295
32296
32297
32298
32299
32300
32301
32302
32303
32304
32305
32306
32307
32308
32309
32310
32311
32312
32313
32314
32315
32316
32317
32318
32319
32320
32321
32322
32323
32324
32325
32326
32327
32328
32329
32330
32331
32332
32333
32334
32335
32336
32337
32338
32339
32340
32341
32342
32343
32344
32345
32346
32347
32348
32349
32350
32351
32352
32353
32354
32355
32356
32357
32358
32359
32360
32361
32362
32363
32364
32365
32366
32367
32368
32369
32370
32371
32372
32373
32374
32375
32376
32377
32378
32379
32380
32381
32382
32383
32384
32385
32386
32387
32388
32389
32390
32391
32392
32393
32394
32395
32396
32397
32398
32399
32400
32401
32402
32403
32404
32405
32406
32407
32408
32409
32410
32411
32412
32413
32414
32415
32416
32417
32418
32419
32420
32421
32422
32423
32424
32425
32426
32427
32428
32429
32430
32431
32432
32433
32434
32435
32436
32437
32438
32439
32440
32441
32442
32443
32444
32445
32446
32447
32448
32449
32450
32451
32452
32453
32454
32455
32456
32457
32458
32459
32460
32461
32462
32463
32464
32465
32466
32467
32468
32469
32470
32471
32472
32473
32474
32475
32476
32477
32478
32479
32480
32481
32482
32483
32484
32485
32486
32487
32488
32489
32490
32491
32492
32493
32494
32495
32496
32497
32498
32499
32500
32501
32502
32503
32504
32505
32506
32507
32508
32509
32510
32511
32512
32513
32514
32515
32516
32517
32518
32519
32520
32521
32522
32523
32524
32525
32526
32527
32528
32529
32530
32531
32532
32533
32534
32535
32536
32537
32538
32539
32540
32541
32542
32543
32544
32545
32546
32547
32548
32549
32550
32551
32552
32553
32554
32555
32556
32557
32558
32559
32560
32561
32562
32563
32564
32565
32566
32567
32568
32569
32570
32571
32572
32573
32574
32575
32576
32577
32578
32579
32580
32581
32582
32583
32584
32585
32586
32587
32588
32589
32590
32591
32592
32593
32594
32595
32596
32597
32598
32599
32600
32601
32602
32603
32604
32605
32606
32607
32608
32609
32610
32611
32612
32613
32614
32615
32616
32617
32618
32619
32620
32621
32622
32623
32624
32625
32626
32627
32628
32629
32630
32631
32632
32633
32634
32635
32636
32637
32638
32639
32640
32641
32642
32643
32644
32645
32646
32647
32648
32649
32650
32651
32652
32653
32654
32655
32656
32657
32658
32659
32660
32661
32662
32663
32664
32665
32666
32667
32668
32669
32670
32671
32672
32673
32674
32675
32676
32677
32678
32679
32680
32681
32682
32683
32684
32685
32686
32687
32688
32689
32690
32691
32692
32693
32694
32695
32696
32697
32698
32699
32700
32701
32702
32703
32704
32705
32706
32707
32708
32709
32710
32711
32712
32713
32714
32715
32716
32717
32718
32719
32720
32721
32722
32723
32724
32725
32726
32727
32728
32729
32730
32731
32732
32733
32734
32735
32736
32737
32738
32739
32740
32741
32742
32743
32744
32745
32746
32747
32748
32749
32750
32751
32752
32753
32754
32755
32756
32757
32758
32759
32760
32761
32762
32763
32764
32765
32766
32767
32768
32769
32770
32771
32772
32773
32774
32775
32776
32777
32778
32779
32780
32781
32782
32783
32784
32785
32786
32787
32788
32789
32790
32791
32792
32793
32794
32795
32796
32797
32798
32799
32800
32801
32802
32803
32804
32805
32806
32807
32808
32809
32810
32811
32812
32813
32814
32815
32816
32817
32818
32819
32820
32821
32822
32823
32824
32825
32826
32827
32828
32829
32830
32831
32832
32833
32834
32835
32836
32837
32838
32839
32840
32841
32842
32843
32844
32845
32846
32847
32848
32849
32850
32851
32852
32853
32854
32855
32856
32857
32858
32859
32860
32861
32862
32863
32864
32865
32866
32867
32868
32869
32870
32871
32872
32873
32874
32875
32876
32877
32878
32879
32880
32881
32882
32883
32884
32885
32886
32887
32888
32889
32890
32891
32892
32893
32894
32895
32896
32897
32898
32899
32900
32901
32902
32903
32904
32905
32906
32907
32908
32909
32910
32911
32912
32913
32914
32915
32916
32917
32918
32919
32920
32921
32922
32923
32924
32925
32926
32927
32928
32929
32930
32931
32932
32933
32934
32935
32936
32937
32938
32939
32940
32941
32942
32943
32944
32945
32946
32947
32948
32949
32950
32951
32952
32953
32954
32955
32956
32957
32958
32959
32960
32961
32962
32963
32964
32965
32966
32967
32968
32969
32970
32971
32972
32973
32974
32975
32976
32977
32978
32979
32980
32981
32982
32983
32984
32985
32986
32987
32988
32989
32990
32991
32992
32993
32994
32995
32996
32997
32998
32999
33000
33001
33002
33003
33004
33005
33006
33007
33008
33009
33010
33011
33012
33013
33014
33015
33016
33017
33018
33019
33020
33021
33022
33023
33024
33025
33026
33027
33028
33029
33030
33031
33032
33033
33034
33035
33036
33037
33038
33039
33040
33041
33042
33043
33044
33045
33046
33047
33048
33049
33050
33051
33052
33053
33054
33055
33056
33057
33058
33059
33060
33061
33062
33063
33064
33065
33066
33067
33068
33069
33070
33071
33072
33073
33074
33075
33076
33077
33078
33079
33080
33081
33082
33083
33084
33085
33086
33087
33088
33089
33090
33091
33092
33093
33094
33095
33096
33097
33098
33099
33100
33101
33102
33103
33104
33105
33106
33107
33108
33109
33110
33111
33112
33113
33114
33115
33116
33117
33118
33119
33120
33121
33122
33123
33124
33125
33126
33127
33128
33129
33130
33131
33132
33133
33134
33135
33136
33137
33138
33139
33140
33141
33142
33143
33144
33145
33146
33147
33148
33149
33150
33151
33152
33153
33154
33155
33156
33157
33158
33159
33160
33161
33162
33163
33164
33165
33166
33167
33168
33169
33170
33171
33172
33173
33174
33175
33176
33177
33178
33179
33180
33181
33182
33183
33184
33185
33186
33187
33188
33189
33190
33191
33192
33193
33194
33195
33196
33197
33198
33199
33200
33201
33202
33203
33204
33205
33206
33207
33208
33209
33210
33211
33212
33213
33214
33215
33216
33217
33218
33219
33220
33221
33222
33223
33224
33225
33226
33227
33228
33229
33230
33231
33232
33233
33234
33235
33236
33237
33238
33239
33240
33241
33242
33243
33244
33245
33246
33247
33248
33249
33250
33251
33252
33253
33254
33255
33256
33257
33258
33259
33260
33261
33262
33263
33264
33265
33266
33267
33268
33269
33270
33271
33272
33273
33274
33275
33276
33277
33278
33279
33280
33281
33282
33283
33284
33285
33286
33287
33288
33289
33290
33291
33292
33293
33294
33295
33296
33297
33298
33299
33300
33301
33302
33303
33304
33305
33306
33307
33308
33309
33310
33311
33312
33313
33314
33315
33316
33317
33318
33319
33320
33321
33322
33323
33324
33325
33326
33327
33328
33329
33330
33331
33332
33333
33334
33335
33336
33337
33338
33339
33340
33341
33342
33343
33344
33345
33346
33347
33348
33349
33350
33351
33352
33353
33354
33355
33356
33357
33358
33359
33360
33361
33362
33363
33364
33365
33366
33367
33368
33369
33370
33371
33372
33373
33374
33375
33376
33377
33378
33379
33380
33381
33382
33383
33384
33385
33386
33387
33388
33389
33390
33391
33392
33393
33394
33395
33396
33397
33398
33399
33400
33401
33402
33403
33404
33405
33406
33407
33408
33409
33410
33411
33412
33413
33414
33415
33416
33417
33418
33419
33420
33421
33422
33423
33424
33425
33426
33427
33428
33429
33430
33431
33432
33433
33434
33435
33436
33437
33438
33439
33440
33441
33442
33443
33444
33445
33446
33447
33448
33449
33450
33451
33452
33453
33454
33455
33456
33457
33458
33459
33460
33461
33462
33463
33464
33465
33466
33467
33468
33469
33470
33471
33472
33473
33474
33475
33476
33477
33478
33479
33480
33481
33482
33483
33484
33485
33486
33487
33488
33489
33490
33491
33492
33493
33494
33495
33496
33497
33498
33499
33500
33501
33502
33503
33504
33505
33506
33507
33508
33509
33510
33511
33512
33513
33514
33515
33516
33517
33518
33519
33520
33521
33522
33523
33524
33525
33526
33527
33528
33529
33530
33531
33532
33533
33534
33535
33536
33537
33538
33539
33540
33541
33542
33543
33544
33545
33546
33547
33548
33549
33550
33551
33552
33553
33554
33555
33556
33557
33558
33559
33560
33561
33562
33563
33564
33565
33566
33567
33568
33569
33570
33571
33572
33573
33574
33575
33576
33577
33578
33579
33580
33581
33582
33583
33584
33585
33586
33587
33588
33589
33590
33591
33592
33593
33594
33595
33596
33597
33598
33599
33600
33601
33602
33603
33604
33605
33606
33607
33608
33609
33610
33611
33612
33613
33614
33615
33616
33617
33618
33619
33620
33621
33622
33623
33624
33625
33626
33627
33628
33629
33630
33631
33632
33633
33634
33635
33636
33637
33638
33639
33640
33641
33642
33643
33644
33645
33646
33647
33648
33649
33650
33651
33652
33653
33654
33655
33656
33657
33658
33659
33660
33661
33662
33663
33664
33665
33666
33667
33668
33669
33670
33671
33672
33673
33674
33675
33676
33677
33678
33679
33680
33681
33682
33683
33684
33685
33686
33687
33688
33689
33690
33691
33692
33693
33694
33695
33696
33697
33698
33699
33700
33701
33702
33703
33704
33705
33706
33707
33708
33709
33710
33711
33712
33713
33714
33715
33716
33717
33718
33719
33720
33721
33722
33723
33724
33725
33726
33727
33728
33729
33730
33731
33732
33733
33734
33735
33736
33737
33738
33739
33740
33741
33742
33743
33744
33745
33746
33747
33748
33749
33750
33751
33752
33753
33754
33755
33756
33757
33758
33759
33760
33761
33762
33763
33764
33765
33766
33767
33768
33769
33770
33771
33772
33773
33774
33775
33776
33777
33778
33779
33780
33781
33782
33783
33784
33785
33786
33787
33788
33789
33790
33791
33792
33793
33794
33795
33796
33797
33798
33799
33800
33801
33802
33803
33804
33805
33806
33807
33808
33809
33810
33811
33812
33813
33814
33815
33816
33817
33818
33819
33820
33821
33822
33823
33824
33825
33826
33827
33828
33829
33830
33831
33832
33833
33834
33835
33836
33837
33838
33839
33840
33841
33842
33843
33844
33845
33846
33847
33848
33849
33850
33851
33852
33853
33854
33855
33856
33857
33858
33859
33860
33861
33862
33863
33864
33865
33866
33867
33868
33869
33870
33871
33872
33873
33874
33875
33876
33877
33878
33879
33880
33881
33882
33883
33884
33885
33886
33887
33888
33889
33890
33891
33892
33893
33894
33895
33896
33897
33898
33899
33900
33901
33902
33903
33904
33905
33906
33907
33908
33909
33910
33911
33912
33913
33914
33915
33916
33917
33918
33919
33920
33921
33922
33923
33924
33925
33926
33927
33928
33929
33930
33931
33932
33933
33934
33935
33936
33937
33938
33939
33940
33941
33942
33943
33944
33945
33946
33947
33948
33949
33950
33951
33952
33953
33954
33955
33956
33957
33958
33959
33960
33961
33962
33963
33964
33965
33966
33967
33968
33969
33970
33971
33972
33973
33974
33975
33976
33977
33978
33979
33980
33981
33982
33983
33984
33985
33986
33987
33988
33989
33990
33991
33992
33993
33994
33995
33996
33997
33998
33999
34000
34001
34002
34003
34004
34005
34006
34007
34008
34009
34010
34011
34012
34013
34014
34015
34016
34017
34018
34019
34020
34021
34022
34023
34024
34025
34026
34027
34028
34029
34030
34031
34032
34033
34034
34035
34036
34037
34038
34039
34040
34041
34042
34043
34044
34045
34046
34047
34048
34049
34050
34051
34052
34053
34054
34055
34056
34057
34058
34059
34060
34061
34062
34063
34064
34065
34066
34067
34068
34069
34070
34071
34072
34073
34074
34075
34076
34077
34078
34079
34080
34081
34082
34083
34084
34085
34086
34087
34088
34089
34090
34091
34092
34093
34094
34095
34096
34097
34098
34099
34100
34101
34102
34103
34104
34105
34106
34107
34108
34109
34110
34111
34112
34113
34114
34115
34116
34117
34118
34119
34120
34121
34122
34123
34124
34125
34126
34127
34128
34129
34130
34131
34132
34133
34134
34135
34136
34137
34138
34139
34140
34141
34142
34143
34144
34145
34146
34147
34148
34149
34150
34151
34152
34153
34154
34155
34156
34157
34158
34159
34160
34161
34162
34163
34164
34165
34166
34167
34168
34169
34170
34171
34172
34173
34174
34175
34176
34177
34178
34179
34180
34181
34182
34183
34184
34185
34186
34187
34188
34189
34190
34191
34192
34193
34194
34195
34196
34197
34198
34199
34200
34201
34202
34203
34204
34205
34206
34207
34208
34209
34210
34211
34212
34213
34214
34215
34216
34217
34218
34219
34220
34221
34222
34223
34224
34225
34226
34227
34228
34229
34230
34231
34232
34233
34234
34235
34236
34237
34238
34239
34240
34241
34242
34243
34244
34245
34246
34247
34248
34249
34250
34251
34252
34253
34254
34255
34256
34257
34258
34259
34260
34261
34262
34263
34264
34265
34266
34267
34268
34269
34270
34271
34272
34273
34274
34275
34276
34277
34278
34279
34280
34281
34282
34283
34284
34285
34286
34287
34288
34289
34290
34291
34292
34293
34294
34295
34296
34297
34298
34299
34300
34301
34302
34303
34304
34305
34306
34307
34308
34309
34310
34311
34312
34313
34314
34315
34316
34317
34318
34319
34320
34321
34322
34323
34324
34325
34326
34327
34328
34329
34330
34331
34332
34333
34334
34335
34336
34337
34338
34339
34340
34341
34342
34343
34344
34345
34346
34347
34348
34349
34350
34351
34352
34353
34354
34355
34356
34357
34358
34359
34360
34361
34362
34363
34364
34365
34366
34367
34368
34369
34370
34371
34372
34373
34374
34375
34376
34377
34378
34379
34380
34381
34382
34383
34384
34385
34386
34387
34388
34389
34390
34391
34392
34393
34394
34395
34396
34397
34398
34399
34400
34401
34402
34403
34404
34405
34406
34407
34408
34409
34410
34411
34412
34413
34414
34415
34416
34417
34418
34419
34420
34421
34422
34423
34424
34425
34426
34427
34428
34429
34430
34431
34432
34433
34434
34435
34436
34437
34438
34439
34440
34441
34442
34443
34444
34445
34446
34447
34448
34449
34450
34451
34452
34453
34454
34455
34456
34457
34458
34459
34460
34461
34462
34463
34464
34465
34466
34467
34468
34469
34470
34471
34472
34473
34474
34475
34476
34477
34478
34479
34480
34481
34482
34483
34484
34485
34486
34487
34488
34489
34490
34491
34492
34493
34494
34495
34496
34497
34498
34499
34500
34501
34502
34503
34504
34505
34506
34507
34508
34509
34510
34511
34512
34513
34514
34515
34516
34517
34518
34519
34520
34521
34522
34523
34524
34525
34526
34527
34528
34529
34530
34531
34532
34533
34534
34535
34536
34537
34538
34539
34540
34541
34542
34543
34544
34545
34546
34547
34548
34549
34550
34551
34552
34553
34554
34555
34556
34557
34558
34559
34560
34561
34562
34563
34564
34565
34566
34567
34568
34569
34570
34571
34572
34573
34574
34575
34576
34577
34578
34579
34580
34581
34582
34583
34584
34585
34586
34587
34588
34589
34590
34591
34592
34593
34594
34595
34596
34597
34598
34599
34600
34601
34602
34603
34604
34605
34606
34607
34608
34609
34610
34611
34612
34613
34614
34615
34616
34617
34618
34619
34620
34621
34622
34623
34624
34625
34626
34627
34628
34629
34630
34631
34632
34633
34634
34635
34636
34637
34638
34639
34640
34641
34642
34643
34644
34645
34646
34647
34648
34649
34650
34651
34652
34653
34654
34655
34656
34657
34658
34659
34660
34661
34662
34663
34664
34665
34666
34667
34668
34669
34670
34671
34672
34673
34674
34675
34676
34677
34678
34679
34680
34681
34682
34683
34684
34685
34686
34687
34688
34689
34690
34691
34692
34693
34694
34695
34696
34697
34698
34699
34700
34701
34702
34703
34704
34705
34706
34707
34708
34709
34710
34711
34712
34713
34714
34715
34716
34717
34718
34719
34720
34721
34722
34723
34724
34725
34726
34727
34728
34729
34730
34731
34732
34733
34734
34735
34736
34737
34738
34739
34740
34741
34742
34743
34744
34745
34746
34747
34748
34749
34750
34751
34752
34753
34754
34755
34756
34757
34758
34759
34760
34761
34762
34763
34764
34765
34766
34767
34768
34769
34770
34771
34772
34773
34774
34775
34776
34777
34778
34779
34780
34781
34782
34783
34784
34785
34786
34787
34788
34789
34790
34791
34792
34793
34794
34795
34796
34797
34798
34799
34800
34801
34802
34803
34804
34805
34806
34807
34808
34809
34810
34811
34812
34813
34814
34815
34816
34817
34818
34819
34820
34821
34822
34823
34824
34825
34826
34827
34828
34829
34830
34831
34832
34833
34834
34835
34836
34837
34838
34839
34840
34841
34842
34843
34844
34845
34846
34847
34848
34849
34850
34851
34852
34853
34854
34855
34856
34857
34858
34859
34860
34861
34862
34863
34864
34865
34866
34867
34868
34869
34870
34871
34872
34873
34874
34875
34876
34877
34878
34879
34880
34881
34882
34883
34884
34885
34886
34887
34888
34889
34890
34891
34892
34893
34894
34895
34896
34897
34898
34899
34900
34901
34902
34903
34904
34905
34906
34907
34908
34909
34910
34911
34912
34913
34914
34915
34916
34917
34918
34919
34920
34921
34922
34923
34924
34925
34926
34927
34928
34929
34930
34931
34932
34933
34934
34935
34936
34937
34938
34939
34940
34941
34942
34943
34944
34945
34946
34947
34948
34949
34950
34951
34952
34953
34954
34955
34956
34957
34958
34959
34960
34961
34962
34963
34964
34965
34966
34967
34968
34969
34970
34971
34972
34973
34974
34975
34976
34977
34978
34979
34980
34981
34982
34983
34984
34985
34986
34987
34988
34989
34990
34991
34992
34993
34994
34995
34996
34997
34998
34999
35000
35001
35002
35003
35004
35005
35006
35007
35008
35009
35010
35011
35012
35013
35014
35015
35016
35017
35018
35019
35020
35021
35022
35023
35024
35025
35026
35027
35028
35029
35030
35031
35032
35033
35034
35035
35036
35037
35038
35039
35040
35041
35042
35043
35044
35045
35046
35047
35048
35049
35050
35051
35052
35053
35054
35055
35056
35057
35058
35059
35060
35061
35062
35063
35064
35065
35066
35067
35068
35069
35070
35071
35072
35073
35074
35075
35076
35077
35078
35079
35080
35081
35082
35083
35084
35085
35086
35087
35088
35089
35090
35091
35092
35093
35094
35095
35096
35097
35098
35099
35100
35101
35102
35103
35104
35105
35106
35107
35108
35109
35110
35111
35112
35113
35114
35115
35116
35117
35118
35119
35120
35121
35122
35123
35124
35125
35126
35127
35128
35129
35130
35131
35132
35133
35134
35135
35136
35137
35138
35139
35140
35141
35142
35143
35144
35145
35146
35147
35148
35149
35150
35151
35152
35153
35154
35155
35156
35157
35158
35159
35160
35161
35162
35163
35164
35165
35166
35167
35168
35169
35170
35171
35172
35173
35174
35175
35176
35177
35178
35179
35180
35181
35182
35183
35184
35185
35186
35187
35188
35189
35190
35191
35192
35193
35194
35195
35196
35197
35198
35199
35200
35201
35202
35203
35204
35205
35206
35207
35208
35209
35210
35211
35212
35213
35214
35215
35216
35217
35218
35219
35220
35221
35222
35223
35224
35225
35226
35227
35228
35229
35230
35231
35232
35233
35234
35235
35236
35237
35238
35239
35240
35241
35242
35243
35244
35245
35246
35247
35248
35249
35250
35251
35252
35253
35254
35255
35256
35257
35258
35259
35260
35261
35262
35263
35264
35265
35266
35267
35268
35269
35270
35271
35272
35273
35274
35275
35276
35277
35278
35279
35280
35281
35282
35283
35284
35285
35286
35287
35288
35289
35290
35291
35292
35293
35294
35295
35296
35297
35298
35299
35300
35301
35302
35303
35304
35305
35306
35307
35308
35309
35310
35311
35312
35313
35314
35315
35316
35317
35318
35319
35320
35321
35322
35323
35324
35325
35326
35327
35328
35329
35330
35331
35332
35333
35334
35335
35336
35337
35338
35339
35340
35341
35342
35343
35344
35345
35346
35347
35348
35349
35350
35351
35352
35353
35354
35355
35356
35357
35358
35359
35360
35361
35362
35363
35364
35365
35366
35367
35368
35369
35370
35371
35372
35373
35374
35375
35376
35377
35378
35379
35380
35381
35382
35383
35384
35385
35386
35387
35388
35389
35390
35391
35392
35393
35394
35395
35396
35397
35398
35399
35400
35401
35402
35403
35404
35405
35406
35407
35408
35409
35410
35411
35412
35413
35414
35415
35416
35417
35418
35419
35420
35421
35422
35423
35424
35425
35426
35427
35428
35429
35430
35431
35432
35433
35434
35435
35436
35437
35438
35439
35440
35441
35442
35443
35444
35445
35446
35447
35448
35449
35450
35451
35452
35453
35454
35455
35456
35457
35458
35459
35460
35461
35462
35463
35464
35465
35466
35467
35468
35469
35470
35471
35472
35473
35474
35475
35476
35477
35478
35479
35480
35481
35482
35483
35484
35485
35486
35487
35488
35489
35490
35491
35492
35493
35494
35495
35496
35497
35498
35499
35500
35501
35502
35503
35504
35505
35506
35507
35508
35509
35510
35511
35512
35513
35514
35515
35516
35517
35518
35519
35520
35521
35522
35523
35524
35525
35526
35527
35528
35529
35530
35531
35532
35533
35534
35535
35536
35537
35538
35539
35540
35541
35542
35543
35544
35545
35546
35547
35548
35549
35550
35551
35552
35553
35554
35555
35556
35557
35558
35559
35560
35561
35562
35563
35564
35565
35566
35567
35568
35569
35570
35571
35572
35573
35574
35575
35576
35577
35578
35579
35580
35581
35582
35583
35584
35585
35586
35587
35588
35589
35590
35591
35592
35593
35594
35595
35596
35597
35598
35599
35600
35601
35602
35603
35604
35605
35606
35607
35608
35609
35610
35611
35612
35613
35614
35615
35616
35617
35618
35619
35620
35621
35622
35623
35624
35625
35626
35627
35628
35629
35630
35631
35632
35633
35634
35635
35636
35637
35638
35639
35640
35641
35642
35643
35644
35645
35646
35647
35648
35649
35650
35651
35652
35653
35654
35655
35656
35657
35658
35659
35660
35661
35662
35663
35664
35665
35666
35667
35668
35669
35670
35671
35672
35673
35674
35675
35676
35677
35678
35679
35680
35681
35682
35683
35684
35685
35686
35687
35688
35689
35690
35691
35692
35693
35694
35695
35696
35697
35698
35699
35700
35701
35702
35703
35704
35705
35706
35707
35708
35709
35710
35711
35712
35713
35714
35715
35716
35717
35718
35719
35720
35721
35722
35723
35724
35725
35726
35727
35728
35729
35730
35731
35732
35733
35734
35735
35736
35737
35738
35739
35740
35741
35742
35743
35744
35745
35746
35747
35748
35749
35750
35751
35752
35753
35754
35755
35756
35757
35758
35759
35760
35761
35762
35763
35764
35765
35766
35767
35768
35769
35770
35771
35772
35773
35774
35775
35776
35777
35778
35779
35780
35781
35782
35783
35784
35785
35786
35787
35788
35789
35790
35791
35792
35793
35794
35795
35796
35797
35798
35799
35800
35801
35802
35803
35804
35805
35806
35807
35808
35809
35810
35811
35812
35813
35814
35815
35816
35817
35818
35819
35820
35821
35822
35823
35824
35825
35826
35827
35828
35829
35830
35831
35832
35833
35834
35835
35836
35837
35838
35839
35840
35841
35842
35843
35844
35845
35846
35847
35848
35849
35850
35851
35852
35853
35854
35855
35856
35857
35858
35859
35860
35861
35862
35863
35864
35865
35866
35867
35868
35869
35870
35871
35872
35873
35874
35875
35876
35877
35878
35879
35880
35881
35882
35883
35884
35885
35886
35887
35888
35889
35890
35891
35892
35893
35894
35895
35896
35897
35898
35899
35900
35901
35902
35903
35904
35905
35906
35907
35908
35909
35910
35911
35912
35913
35914
35915
35916
35917
35918
35919
35920
35921
35922
35923
35924
35925
35926
35927
35928
35929
35930
35931
35932
35933
35934
35935
35936
35937
35938
35939
35940
35941
35942
35943
35944
35945
35946
35947
35948
35949
35950
35951
35952
35953
35954
35955
35956
35957
35958
35959
35960
35961
35962
35963
35964
35965
35966
35967
35968
35969
35970
35971
35972
35973
35974
35975
35976
35977
35978
35979
35980
35981
35982
35983
35984
35985
35986
35987
35988
35989
35990
35991
35992
35993
35994
35995
35996
35997
35998
35999
36000
36001
36002
36003
36004
36005
36006
36007
36008
36009
36010
36011
36012
36013
36014
36015
36016
36017
36018
36019
36020
36021
36022
36023
36024
36025
36026
36027
36028
36029
36030
36031
36032
36033
36034
36035
36036
36037
36038
36039
36040
36041
36042
36043
36044
36045
36046
36047
36048
36049
36050
36051
36052
36053
36054
36055
36056
36057
36058
36059
36060
36061
36062
36063
36064
36065
36066
36067
36068
36069
36070
36071
36072
36073
36074
36075
36076
36077
36078
36079
36080
36081
36082
36083
36084
36085
36086
36087
36088
36089
36090
36091
36092
36093
36094
36095
36096
36097
36098
36099
36100
36101
36102
36103
36104
36105
36106
36107
36108
36109
36110
36111
36112
36113
36114
36115
36116
36117
36118
36119
36120
36121
36122
36123
36124
36125
36126
36127
36128
36129
36130
36131
36132
36133
36134
36135
36136
36137
36138
36139
36140
36141
36142
36143
36144
36145
36146
36147
36148
36149
36150
36151
36152
36153
36154
36155
36156
36157
36158
36159
36160
36161
36162
36163
36164
36165
36166
36167
36168
36169
36170
36171
36172
36173
36174
36175
36176
36177
36178
36179
36180
36181
36182
36183
36184
36185
36186
36187
36188
36189
36190
36191
36192
36193
36194
36195
36196
36197
36198
36199
36200
36201
36202
36203
36204
36205
36206
36207
36208
36209
36210
36211
36212
36213
36214
36215
36216
36217
36218
36219
36220
36221
36222
36223
36224
36225
36226
36227
36228
36229
36230
36231
36232
36233
36234
36235
36236
36237
36238
36239
36240
36241
36242
36243
36244
36245
36246
36247
36248
36249
36250
36251
36252
36253
36254
36255
36256
36257
36258
36259
36260
36261
36262
36263
36264
36265
36266
36267
36268
36269
36270
36271
36272
36273
36274
36275
36276
36277
36278
36279
36280
36281
36282
36283
36284
36285
36286
36287
36288
36289
36290
36291
36292
36293
36294
36295
36296
36297
36298
36299
36300
36301
36302
36303
36304
36305
36306
36307
36308
36309
36310
36311
36312
36313
36314
36315
36316
36317
36318
36319
36320
36321
36322
36323
36324
36325
36326
36327
36328
36329
36330
36331
36332
36333
36334
36335
36336
36337
36338
36339
36340
36341
36342
36343
36344
36345
36346
36347
36348
36349
36350
36351
36352
36353
36354
36355
36356
36357
36358
36359
36360
36361
36362
36363
36364
36365
36366
36367
36368
36369
36370
36371
36372
36373
36374
36375
36376
36377
36378
36379
36380
36381
36382
36383
36384
36385
36386
36387
36388
36389
36390
36391
36392
36393
36394
36395
36396
36397
36398
36399
36400
36401
36402
36403
36404
36405
36406
36407
36408
36409
36410
36411
36412
36413
36414
36415
36416
36417
36418
36419
36420
36421
36422
36423
36424
36425
36426
36427
36428
36429
36430
36431
36432
36433
36434
36435
36436
36437
36438
36439
36440
36441
36442
36443
36444
36445
36446
36447
36448
36449
36450
36451
36452
36453
36454
36455
36456
36457
36458
36459
36460
36461
36462
36463
36464
36465
36466
36467
36468
36469
36470
36471
36472
36473
36474
36475
36476
36477
36478
36479
36480
36481
36482
36483
36484
36485
36486
36487
36488
36489
36490
36491
36492
36493
36494
36495
36496
36497
36498
36499
36500
36501
36502
36503
36504
36505
36506
36507
36508
36509
36510
36511
36512
36513
36514
36515
36516
36517
36518
36519
36520
36521
36522
36523
36524
36525
36526
36527
36528
36529
36530
36531
36532
36533
36534
36535
36536
36537
36538
36539
36540
36541
36542
36543
36544
36545
36546
36547
36548
36549
36550
36551
36552
36553
36554
36555
36556
36557
36558
36559
36560
36561
36562
36563
36564
36565
36566
36567
36568
36569
36570
36571
36572
36573
36574
36575
36576
36577
36578
36579
36580
36581
36582
36583
36584
36585
36586
36587
36588
36589
36590
36591
36592
36593
36594
36595
36596
36597
36598
36599
36600
36601
36602
36603
36604
36605
36606
36607
36608
36609
36610
36611
36612
36613
36614
36615
36616
36617
36618
36619
36620
36621
36622
36623
36624
36625
36626
36627
36628
36629
36630
36631
36632
36633
36634
36635
36636
36637
36638
36639
36640
36641
36642
36643
36644
36645
36646
36647
36648
36649
36650
36651
36652
36653
36654
36655
36656
36657
36658
36659
36660
36661
36662
36663
36664
36665
36666
36667
36668
36669
36670
36671
36672
36673
36674
36675
36676
36677
36678
36679
36680
36681
36682
36683
36684
36685
36686
36687
36688
36689
36690
36691
36692
36693
36694
36695
36696
36697
36698
36699
36700
36701
36702
36703
36704
36705
36706
36707
36708
36709
36710
36711
36712
36713
36714
36715
36716
36717
36718
36719
36720
36721
36722
36723
36724
36725
36726
36727
36728
36729
36730
36731
36732
36733
36734
36735
36736
36737
36738
36739
36740
36741
36742
36743
36744
36745
36746
36747
36748
36749
36750
36751
36752
36753
36754
36755
36756
36757
36758
36759
36760
36761
36762
36763
36764
36765
36766
36767
36768
36769
36770
36771
36772
36773
36774
36775
36776
36777
36778
36779
36780
36781
36782
36783
36784
36785
36786
36787
36788
36789
36790
36791
36792
36793
36794
36795
36796
36797
36798
36799
36800
36801
36802
36803
36804
36805
36806
36807
36808
36809
36810
36811
36812
36813
36814
36815
36816
36817
36818
36819
36820
36821
36822
36823
36824
36825
36826
36827
36828
36829
36830
36831
36832
36833
36834
36835
36836
36837
36838
36839
36840
36841
36842
36843
36844
36845
36846
36847
36848
36849
36850
36851
36852
36853
36854
36855
36856
36857
36858
36859
36860
36861
36862
36863
36864
36865
36866
36867
36868
36869
36870
36871
36872
36873
36874
36875
36876
36877
36878
36879
36880
36881
36882
36883
36884
36885
36886
36887
36888
36889
36890
36891
36892
36893
36894
36895
36896
36897
36898
36899
36900
36901
36902
36903
36904
36905
36906
36907
36908
36909
36910
36911
36912
36913
36914
36915
36916
36917
36918
36919
36920
36921
36922
36923
36924
36925
36926
36927
36928
36929
36930
36931
36932
36933
36934
36935
36936
36937
36938
36939
36940
36941
36942
36943
36944
36945
36946
36947
36948
36949
36950
36951
36952
36953
36954
36955
36956
36957
36958
36959
36960
36961
36962
36963
36964
36965
36966
36967
36968
36969
36970
36971
36972
36973
36974
36975
36976
36977
36978
36979
36980
36981
36982
36983
36984
36985
36986
36987
36988
36989
36990
36991
36992
36993
36994
36995
36996
36997
36998
36999
37000
37001
37002
37003
37004
37005
37006
37007
37008
37009
37010
37011
37012
37013
37014
37015
37016
37017
37018
37019
37020
37021
37022
37023
37024
37025
37026
37027
37028
37029
37030
37031
37032
37033
37034
37035
37036
37037
37038
37039
37040
37041
37042
37043
37044
37045
37046
37047
37048
37049
37050
37051
37052
37053
37054
37055
37056
37057
37058
37059
37060
37061
37062
37063
37064
37065
37066
37067
37068
37069
37070
37071
37072
37073
37074
37075
37076
37077
37078
37079
37080
37081
37082
37083
37084
37085
37086
37087
37088
37089
37090
37091
37092
37093
37094
37095
37096
37097
37098
37099
37100
37101
37102
37103
37104
37105
37106
37107
37108
37109
37110
37111
37112
37113
37114
37115
37116
37117
37118
37119
37120
37121
37122
37123
37124
37125
37126
37127
37128
37129
37130
37131
37132
37133
37134
37135
37136
37137
37138
37139
37140
37141
37142
37143
37144
37145
37146
37147
37148
37149
37150
37151
37152
37153
37154
37155
37156
37157
37158
37159
37160
37161
37162
37163
37164
37165
37166
37167
37168
37169
37170
37171
37172
37173
37174
37175
37176
37177
37178
37179
37180
37181
37182
37183
37184
37185
37186
37187
37188
37189
37190
37191
37192
37193
37194
37195
37196
37197
37198
37199
37200
37201
37202
37203
37204
37205
37206
37207
37208
37209
37210
37211
37212
37213
37214
37215
37216
37217
37218
37219
37220
37221
37222
37223
37224
37225
37226
37227
37228
37229
37230
37231
37232
37233
37234
37235
37236
37237
37238
37239
37240
37241
37242
37243
37244
37245
37246
37247
37248
37249
37250
37251
37252
37253
37254
37255
37256
37257
37258
37259
37260
37261
37262
37263
37264
37265
37266
37267
37268
37269
37270
37271
37272
37273
37274
37275
37276
37277
37278
37279
37280
37281
37282
37283
37284
37285
37286
37287
37288
37289
37290
37291
37292
37293
37294
37295
37296
37297
37298
37299
37300
37301
37302
37303
37304
37305
37306
37307
37308
37309
37310
37311
37312
37313
37314
37315
37316
37317
37318
37319
37320
37321
37322
37323
37324
37325
37326
37327
37328
37329
37330
37331
37332
37333
37334
37335
37336
37337
37338
37339
37340
37341
37342
37343
37344
37345
37346
37347
37348
37349
37350
37351
37352
37353
37354
37355
37356
37357
37358
37359
37360
37361
37362
37363
37364
37365
37366
37367
37368
37369
37370
37371
37372
37373
37374
37375
37376
37377
37378
37379
37380
37381
37382
37383
37384
37385
37386
37387
37388
37389
37390
37391
37392
37393
37394
37395
37396
37397
37398
37399
37400
37401
37402
37403
37404
37405
37406
37407
37408
37409
37410
37411
37412
37413
37414
37415
37416
37417
37418
37419
37420
37421
37422
37423
37424
37425
37426
37427
37428
37429
37430
37431
37432
37433
37434
37435
37436
37437
37438
37439
37440
37441
37442
37443
37444
37445
37446
37447
37448
37449
37450
37451
37452
37453
37454
37455
37456
37457
37458
37459
37460
37461
37462
37463
37464
37465
37466
37467
37468
37469
37470
37471
37472
37473
37474
37475
37476
37477
37478
37479
37480
37481
37482
37483
37484
37485
37486
37487
37488
37489
37490
37491
37492
37493
37494
37495
37496
37497
37498
37499
37500
37501
37502
37503
37504
37505
37506
37507
37508
37509
37510
37511
37512
37513
37514
37515
37516
37517
37518
37519
37520
37521
37522
37523
37524
37525
37526
37527
37528
37529
37530
37531
37532
37533
37534
37535
37536
37537
37538
37539
37540
37541
37542
37543
37544
37545
37546
37547
37548
37549
37550
37551
37552
37553
37554
37555
37556
37557
37558
37559
37560
37561
37562
37563
37564
37565
37566
37567
37568
37569
37570
37571
37572
37573
37574
37575
37576
37577
37578
37579
37580
37581
37582
37583
37584
37585
37586
37587
37588
37589
37590
37591
37592
37593
37594
37595
37596
37597
37598
37599
37600
37601
37602
37603
37604
37605
37606
37607
37608
37609
37610
37611
37612
37613
37614
37615
37616
37617
37618
37619
37620
37621
37622
37623
37624
37625
37626
37627
37628
37629
37630
37631
37632
37633
37634
37635
37636
37637
37638
37639
37640
37641
37642
37643
37644
37645
37646
37647
37648
37649
37650
37651
37652
37653
37654
37655
37656
37657
37658
37659
37660
37661
37662
37663
37664
37665
37666
37667
37668
37669
37670
37671
37672
37673
37674
37675
37676
37677
37678
37679
37680
37681
37682
37683
37684
37685
37686
37687
37688
37689
37690
37691
37692
37693
37694
37695
37696
37697
37698
37699
37700
37701
37702
37703
37704
37705
37706
37707
37708
37709
37710
37711
37712
37713
37714
37715
37716
37717
37718
37719
37720
37721
37722
37723
37724
37725
37726
37727
37728
37729
37730
37731
37732
37733
37734
37735
37736
37737
37738
37739
37740
37741
37742
37743
37744
37745
37746
37747
37748
37749
37750
37751
37752
37753
37754
37755
37756
37757
37758
37759
37760
37761
37762
37763
37764
37765
37766
37767
37768
37769
37770
37771
37772
37773
37774
37775
37776
37777
37778
37779
37780
37781
37782
37783
37784
37785
37786
37787
37788
37789
37790
37791
37792
37793
37794
37795
37796
37797
37798
37799
37800
37801
37802
37803
37804
37805
37806
37807
37808
37809
37810
37811
37812
37813
37814
37815
37816
37817
37818
37819
37820
37821
37822
37823
37824
37825
37826
37827
37828
37829
37830
37831
37832
37833
37834
37835
37836
37837
37838
37839
37840
37841
37842
37843
37844
37845
37846
37847
37848
37849
37850
37851
37852
37853
37854
37855
37856
37857
37858
37859
37860
37861
37862
37863
37864
37865
37866
37867
37868
37869
37870
37871
37872
37873
37874
37875
37876
37877
37878
37879
37880
37881
37882
37883
37884
37885
37886
37887
37888
37889
37890
37891
37892
37893
37894
37895
37896
37897
37898
37899
37900
37901
37902
37903
37904
37905
37906
37907
37908
37909
37910
37911
37912
37913
37914
37915
37916
37917
37918
37919
37920
37921
37922
37923
37924
37925
37926
37927
37928
37929
37930
37931
37932
37933
37934
37935
37936
37937
37938
37939
37940
37941
37942
37943
37944
37945
37946
37947
37948
37949
37950
37951
37952
37953
37954
37955
37956
37957
37958
37959
37960
37961
37962
37963
37964
37965
37966
37967
37968
37969
37970
37971
37972
37973
37974
37975
37976
37977
37978
37979
37980
37981
37982
37983
37984
37985
37986
37987
37988
37989
37990
37991
37992
37993
37994
37995
37996
37997
37998
37999
38000
38001
38002
38003
38004
38005
38006
38007
38008
38009
38010
38011
38012
38013
38014
38015
38016
38017
38018
38019
38020
38021
38022
38023
38024
38025
38026
38027
38028
38029
38030
38031
38032
38033
38034
38035
38036
38037
38038
38039
38040
38041
38042
38043
38044
38045
38046
38047
38048
38049
38050
38051
38052
38053
38054
38055
38056
38057
38058
38059
38060
38061
38062
38063
38064
38065
38066
38067
38068
38069
38070
38071
38072
38073
38074
38075
38076
38077
38078
38079
38080
38081
38082
38083
38084
38085
38086
38087
38088
38089
38090
38091
38092
38093
38094
38095
38096
38097
38098
38099
38100
38101
38102
38103
38104
38105
38106
38107
38108
38109
38110
38111
38112
38113
38114
38115
38116
38117
38118
38119
38120
38121
38122
38123
38124
38125
38126
38127
38128
38129
38130
38131
38132
38133
38134
38135
38136
38137
38138
38139
38140
38141
38142
38143
38144
38145
38146
38147
38148
38149
38150
38151
38152
38153
38154
38155
38156
38157
38158
38159
38160
38161
38162
38163
38164
38165
38166
38167
38168
38169
38170
38171
38172
38173
38174
38175
38176
38177
38178
38179
38180
38181
38182
38183
38184
38185
38186
38187
38188
38189
38190
38191
38192
38193
38194
38195
38196
38197
38198
38199
38200
38201
38202
38203
38204
38205
38206
38207
38208
38209
38210
38211
38212
38213
38214
38215
38216
38217
38218
38219
38220
38221
38222
38223
38224
38225
38226
38227
38228
38229
38230
38231
38232
38233
38234
38235
38236
38237
38238
38239
38240
38241
38242
38243
38244
38245
38246
38247
38248
38249
38250
38251
38252
38253
38254
38255
38256
38257
38258
38259
38260
38261
38262
38263
38264
38265
38266
38267
38268
38269
38270
38271
38272
38273
38274
38275
38276
38277
38278
38279
38280
38281
38282
38283
38284
38285
38286
38287
38288
38289
38290
38291
38292
38293
38294
38295
38296
38297
38298
38299
38300
38301
38302
38303
38304
38305
38306
38307
38308
38309
38310
38311
38312
38313
38314
38315
38316
38317
38318
38319
38320
38321
38322
38323
38324
38325
38326
38327
38328
38329
38330
38331
38332
38333
38334
38335
38336
38337
38338
38339
38340
38341
38342
38343
38344
38345
38346
38347
38348
38349
38350
38351
38352
38353
38354
38355
38356
38357
38358
38359
38360
38361
38362
38363
38364
38365
38366
38367
38368
38369
38370
38371
38372
38373
38374
38375
38376
38377
38378
38379
38380
38381
38382
38383
38384
38385
38386
38387
38388
38389
38390
38391
38392
38393
38394
38395
38396
38397
38398
38399
38400
38401
38402
38403
38404
38405
38406
38407
38408
38409
38410
38411
38412
38413
38414
38415
38416
38417
38418
38419
38420
38421
38422
38423
38424
38425
38426
38427
38428
38429
38430
38431
38432
38433
38434
38435
38436
38437
38438
38439
38440
38441
38442
38443
38444
38445
38446
38447
38448
38449
38450
38451
38452
38453
38454
38455
38456
38457
38458
38459
38460
38461
38462
38463
38464
38465
38466
38467
38468
38469
38470
38471
38472
38473
38474
38475
38476
38477
38478
38479
38480
38481
38482
38483
38484
38485
38486
38487
38488
38489
38490
38491
38492
38493
38494
38495
38496
38497
38498
38499
38500
38501
38502
38503
38504
38505
38506
38507
38508
38509
38510
38511
38512
38513
38514
38515
38516
38517
38518
38519
38520
38521
38522
38523
38524
38525
38526
38527
38528
38529
38530
38531
38532
38533
38534
38535
38536
38537
38538
38539
38540
38541
38542
38543
38544
38545
38546
38547
38548
38549
38550
38551
38552
38553
38554
38555
38556
38557
38558
38559
38560
38561
38562
38563
38564
38565
38566
38567
38568
38569
38570
38571
38572
38573
38574
38575
38576
38577
38578
38579
38580
38581
38582
38583
38584
38585
38586
38587
38588
38589
38590
38591
38592
38593
38594
38595
38596
38597
38598
38599
38600
38601
38602
38603
38604
38605
38606
38607
38608
38609
38610
38611
38612
38613
38614
38615
38616
38617
38618
38619
38620
38621
38622
38623
38624
38625
38626
38627
38628
38629
38630
38631
38632
38633
38634
38635
38636
38637
38638
38639
38640
38641
38642
38643
38644
38645
38646
38647
38648
38649
38650
38651
38652
38653
38654
38655
38656
38657
38658
38659
38660
38661
38662
38663
38664
38665
38666
38667
38668
38669
38670
38671
38672
38673
38674
38675
38676
38677
38678
38679
38680
38681
38682
38683
38684
38685
38686
38687
38688
38689
38690
38691
38692
38693
38694
38695
38696
38697
38698
38699
38700
38701
38702
38703
38704
38705
38706
38707
38708
38709
38710
38711
38712
38713
38714
38715
38716
38717
38718
38719
38720
38721
38722
38723
38724
38725
38726
38727
38728
38729
38730
38731
38732
38733
38734
38735
38736
38737
38738
38739
38740
38741
38742
38743
38744
38745
38746
38747
38748
38749
38750
38751
38752
38753
38754
38755
38756
38757
38758
38759
38760
38761
38762
38763
38764
38765
38766
38767
38768
38769
38770
38771
38772
38773
38774
38775
38776
38777
38778
38779
38780
38781
38782
38783
38784
38785
38786
38787
38788
38789
38790
38791
38792
38793
38794
38795
38796
38797
38798
38799
38800
38801
38802
38803
38804
38805
38806
38807
38808
38809
38810
38811
38812
38813
38814
38815
38816
38817
38818
38819
38820
38821
38822
38823
38824
38825
38826
38827
38828
38829
38830
38831
38832
38833
38834
38835
38836
38837
38838
38839
38840
38841
38842
38843
38844
38845
38846
38847
38848
38849
38850
38851
38852
38853
38854
38855
38856
38857
38858
38859
38860
38861
38862
38863
38864
38865
38866
38867
38868
38869
38870
38871
38872
38873
38874
38875
38876
38877
38878
38879
38880
38881
38882
38883
38884
38885
38886
38887
38888
38889
38890
38891
38892
38893
38894
38895
38896
38897
38898
38899
38900
38901
38902
38903
38904
38905
38906
38907
38908
38909
38910
38911
38912
38913
38914
38915
38916
38917
38918
38919
38920
38921
38922
38923
38924
38925
38926
38927
38928
38929
38930
38931
38932
38933
38934
38935
38936
38937
38938
38939
38940
38941
38942
38943
38944
38945
38946
38947
38948
38949
38950
38951
38952
38953
38954
38955
38956
38957
38958
38959
38960
38961
38962
38963
38964
38965
38966
38967
38968
38969
38970
38971
38972
38973
38974
38975
38976
38977
38978
38979
38980
38981
38982
38983
38984
38985
38986
38987
38988
38989
38990
38991
38992
38993
38994
38995
38996
38997
38998
38999
39000
39001
39002
39003
39004
39005
39006
39007
39008
39009
39010
39011
39012
39013
39014
39015
39016
39017
39018
39019
39020
39021
39022
39023
39024
39025
39026
39027
39028
39029
39030
39031
39032
39033
39034
39035
39036
39037
39038
39039
39040
39041
39042
39043
39044
39045
39046
39047
39048
39049
39050
39051
39052
39053
39054
39055
39056
39057
39058
39059
39060
39061
39062
39063
39064
39065
39066
39067
39068
39069
39070
39071
39072
39073
39074
39075
39076
39077
39078
39079
39080
39081
39082
39083
39084
39085
39086
39087
39088
39089
39090
39091
39092
39093
39094
39095
39096
39097
39098
39099
39100
39101
39102
39103
39104
39105
39106
39107
39108
39109
39110
39111
39112
39113
39114
39115
39116
39117
39118
39119
39120
39121
39122
39123
39124
39125
39126
39127
39128
39129
39130
39131
39132
39133
39134
39135
39136
39137
39138
39139
39140
39141
39142
39143
39144
39145
39146
39147
39148
39149
39150
39151
39152
39153
39154
39155
39156
39157
39158
39159
39160
39161
39162
39163
39164
39165
39166
39167
39168
39169
39170
39171
39172
39173
39174
39175
39176
39177
39178
39179
39180
39181
39182
39183
39184
39185
39186
39187
39188
39189
39190
39191
39192
39193
39194
39195
39196
39197
39198
39199
39200
39201
39202
39203
39204
39205
39206
39207
39208
39209
39210
39211
39212
39213
39214
39215
39216
39217
39218
39219
39220
39221
39222
39223
39224
39225
39226
39227
39228
39229
39230
39231
39232
39233
39234
39235
39236
39237
39238
39239
39240
39241
39242
39243
39244
39245
39246
39247
39248
39249
39250
39251
39252
39253
39254
39255
39256
39257
39258
39259
39260
39261
39262
39263
39264
39265
39266
39267
39268
39269
39270
39271
39272
39273
39274
39275
39276
39277
39278
39279
39280
39281
39282
39283
39284
39285
39286
39287
39288
39289
39290
39291
39292
39293
39294
39295
39296
39297
39298
39299
39300
39301
39302
39303
39304
39305
39306
39307
39308
39309
39310
39311
39312
39313
39314
39315
39316
39317
39318
39319
39320
39321
39322
39323
39324
39325
39326
39327
39328
39329
39330
39331
39332
39333
39334
39335
39336
39337
39338
39339
39340
39341
39342
39343
39344
39345
39346
39347
39348
39349
39350
39351
39352
39353
39354
39355
39356
39357
39358
39359
39360
39361
39362
39363
39364
39365
39366
39367
39368
39369
39370
39371
39372
39373
39374
39375
39376
39377
39378
39379
39380
39381
39382
39383
39384
39385
39386
39387
39388
39389
39390
39391
39392
39393
39394
39395
39396
39397
39398
39399
39400
39401
39402
39403
39404
39405
39406
39407
39408
39409
39410
39411
39412
39413
39414
39415
39416
39417
39418
39419
39420
39421
39422
39423
39424
39425
39426
39427
39428
39429
39430
39431
39432
39433
39434
39435
39436
39437
39438
39439
39440
39441
39442
39443
39444
39445
39446
39447
39448
39449
39450
39451
39452
39453
39454
39455
39456
39457
39458
39459
39460
39461
39462
39463
39464
39465
39466
39467
39468
39469
39470
39471
39472
39473
39474
39475
39476
39477
39478
39479
39480
39481
39482
39483
39484
39485
39486
39487
39488
39489
39490
39491
39492
39493
39494
39495
39496
39497
39498
39499
39500
39501
39502
39503
39504
39505
39506
39507
39508
39509
39510
39511
39512
39513
39514
39515
39516
39517
39518
39519
39520
39521
39522
39523
39524
39525
39526
39527
39528
39529
39530
39531
39532
39533
39534
39535
39536
39537
39538
39539
39540
39541
39542
39543
39544
39545
39546
39547
39548
39549
39550
39551
39552
39553
39554
39555
39556
39557
39558
39559
39560
39561
39562
39563
39564
39565
39566
39567
39568
39569
39570
39571
39572
39573
39574
39575
39576
39577
39578
39579
39580
39581
39582
39583
39584
39585
39586
39587
39588
39589
39590
39591
39592
39593
39594
39595
39596
39597
39598
39599
39600
39601
39602
39603
39604
39605
39606
39607
39608
39609
39610
39611
39612
39613
39614
39615
39616
39617
39618
39619
39620
39621
39622
39623
39624
39625
39626
39627
39628
39629
39630
39631
39632
39633
39634
39635
39636
39637
39638
39639
39640
39641
39642
39643
39644
39645
39646
39647
39648
39649
39650
39651
39652
39653
39654
39655
39656
39657
39658
39659
39660
39661
39662
39663
39664
39665
39666
39667
39668
39669
39670
39671
39672
39673
39674
39675
39676
39677
39678
39679
39680
39681
39682
39683
39684
39685
39686
39687
39688
39689
39690
39691
39692
39693
39694
39695
39696
39697
39698
39699
39700
39701
39702
39703
39704
39705
39706
39707
39708
39709
39710
39711
39712
39713
39714
39715
39716
39717
39718
39719
39720
39721
39722
39723
39724
39725
39726
39727
39728
39729
39730
39731
39732
39733
39734
39735
39736
39737
39738
39739
39740
39741
39742
39743
39744
39745
39746
39747
39748
39749
39750
39751
39752
39753
39754
39755
39756
39757
39758
39759
39760
39761
39762
39763
39764
39765
39766
39767
39768
39769
39770
39771
39772
39773
39774
39775
39776
39777
39778
39779
39780
39781
39782
39783
39784
39785
39786
39787
39788
39789
39790
39791
39792
39793
39794
39795
39796
39797
39798
39799
39800
39801
39802
39803
39804
39805
39806
39807
39808
39809
39810
39811
39812
39813
39814
39815
39816
39817
39818
39819
39820
39821
39822
39823
39824
39825
39826
39827
39828
39829
39830
39831
39832
39833
39834
39835
39836
39837
39838
39839
39840
39841
39842
39843
39844
39845
39846
39847
39848
39849
39850
39851
39852
39853
39854
39855
39856
39857
39858
39859
39860
39861
39862
39863
39864
39865
39866
39867
39868
39869
39870
39871
39872
39873
39874
39875
39876
39877
39878
39879
39880
39881
39882
39883
39884
39885
39886
39887
39888
39889
39890
39891
39892
39893
39894
39895
39896
39897
39898
39899
39900
39901
39902
39903
39904
39905
39906
39907
39908
39909
39910
39911
39912
39913
39914
39915
39916
39917
39918
39919
39920
39921
39922
39923
39924
39925
39926
39927
39928
39929
39930
39931
39932
39933
39934
39935
39936
39937
39938
39939
39940
39941
39942
39943
39944
39945
39946
39947
39948
39949
39950
39951
39952
39953
39954
39955
39956
39957
39958
39959
39960
39961
39962
39963
39964
39965
39966
39967
39968
39969
39970
39971
39972
39973
39974
39975
39976
39977
39978
39979
39980
39981
39982
39983
39984
39985
39986
39987
39988
39989
39990
39991
39992
39993
39994
39995
39996
39997
39998
39999
40000
40001
40002
40003
40004
40005
40006
40007
40008
40009
40010
40011
40012
40013
40014
40015
40016
40017
40018
40019
40020
40021
40022
40023
40024
40025
40026
40027
40028
40029
40030
40031
40032
40033
40034
40035
40036
40037
40038
40039
40040
40041
40042
40043
40044
40045
40046
40047
40048
40049
40050
40051
40052
40053
40054
40055
40056
40057
40058
40059
40060
40061
40062
40063
40064
40065
40066
40067
40068
40069
40070
40071
40072
40073
40074
40075
40076
40077
40078
40079
40080
40081
40082
40083
40084
40085
40086
40087
40088
40089
40090
40091
40092
40093
40094
40095
40096
40097
40098
40099
40100
40101
40102
40103
40104
40105
40106
40107
40108
40109
40110
40111
40112
40113
40114
40115
40116
40117
40118
40119
40120
40121
40122
40123
40124
40125
40126
40127
40128
40129
40130
40131
40132
40133
40134
40135
40136
40137
40138
40139
40140
40141
40142
40143
40144
40145
40146
40147
40148
40149
40150
40151
40152
40153
40154
40155
40156
40157
40158
40159
40160
40161
40162
40163
40164
40165
40166
40167
40168
40169
40170
40171
40172
40173
40174
40175
40176
40177
40178
40179
40180
40181
40182
40183
40184
40185
40186
40187
40188
40189
40190
40191
40192
40193
40194
40195
40196
40197
40198
40199
40200
40201
40202
40203
40204
40205
40206
40207
40208
40209
40210
40211
40212
40213
40214
40215
40216
40217
40218
40219
40220
40221
40222
40223
40224
40225
40226
40227
40228
40229
40230
40231
40232
40233
40234
40235
40236
40237
40238
40239
40240
40241
40242
40243
40244
40245
40246
40247
40248
40249
40250
40251
40252
40253
40254
40255
40256
40257
40258
40259
40260
40261
40262
40263
40264
40265
40266
40267
40268
40269
40270
40271
40272
40273
40274
40275
40276
40277
40278
40279
40280
40281
40282
40283
40284
40285
40286
40287
40288
40289
40290
40291
40292
40293
40294
40295
40296
40297
40298
40299
40300
40301
40302
40303
40304
40305
40306
40307
40308
40309
40310
40311
40312
40313
40314
40315
40316
40317
40318
40319
40320
40321
40322
40323
40324
40325
40326
40327
40328
40329
40330
40331
40332
40333
40334
40335
40336
40337
40338
40339
40340
40341
40342
40343
40344
40345
40346
40347
40348
40349
40350
40351
40352
40353
40354
40355
40356
40357
40358
40359
40360
40361
40362
40363
40364
40365
40366
40367
40368
40369
40370
40371
40372
40373
40374
40375
40376
40377
40378
40379
40380
40381
40382
40383
40384
40385
40386
40387
40388
40389
40390
40391
40392
40393
40394
40395
40396
40397
40398
40399
40400
40401
40402
40403
40404
40405
40406
40407
40408
40409
40410
40411
40412
40413
40414
40415
40416
40417
40418
40419
40420
40421
40422
40423
40424
40425
40426
40427
40428
40429
40430
40431
40432
40433
40434
40435
40436
40437
40438
40439
40440
40441
40442
40443
40444
40445
40446
40447
40448
40449
40450
40451
40452
40453
40454
40455
40456
40457
40458
40459
40460
40461
40462
40463
40464
40465
40466
40467
40468
40469
40470
40471
40472
40473
40474
40475
40476
40477
40478
40479
40480
40481
40482
40483
40484
40485
40486
40487
40488
40489
40490
40491
40492
40493
40494
40495
40496
40497
40498
40499
40500
40501
40502
40503
40504
40505
40506
40507
40508
40509
40510
40511
40512
40513
40514
40515
40516
40517
40518
40519
40520
40521
40522
40523
40524
40525
40526
40527
40528
40529
40530
40531
40532
40533
40534
40535
40536
40537
40538
40539
40540
40541
40542
40543
40544
40545
40546
40547
40548
40549
40550
40551
40552
40553
40554
40555
40556
40557
40558
40559
40560
40561
40562
40563
40564
40565
40566
40567
40568
40569
40570
40571
40572
40573
40574
40575
40576
40577
40578
40579
40580
40581
40582
40583
40584
40585
40586
40587
40588
40589
40590
40591
40592
40593
40594
40595
40596
40597
40598
40599
40600
40601
40602
40603
40604
40605
40606
40607
40608
40609
40610
40611
40612
40613
40614
40615
40616
40617
40618
40619
40620
40621
40622
40623
40624
40625
40626
40627
40628
40629
40630
40631
40632
40633
40634
40635
40636
40637
40638
40639
40640
40641
40642
40643
40644
40645
40646
40647
40648
40649
40650
40651
40652
40653
40654
40655
40656
40657
40658
40659
40660
40661
40662
40663
40664
40665
40666
40667
40668
40669
40670
40671
40672
40673
40674
40675
40676
40677
40678
40679
40680
40681
40682
40683
40684
40685
40686
40687
40688
40689
40690
40691
40692
40693
40694
40695
40696
40697
40698
40699
40700
40701
40702
40703
40704
40705
40706
40707
40708
40709
40710
40711
40712
40713
40714
40715
40716
40717
40718
40719
40720
40721
40722
40723
40724
40725
40726
40727
40728
40729
40730
40731
40732
40733
40734
40735
40736
40737
40738
40739
40740
40741
40742
40743
40744
40745
40746
40747
40748
40749
40750
40751
40752
40753
40754
40755
40756
40757
40758
40759
40760
40761
40762
40763
40764
40765
40766
40767
40768
40769
40770
40771
40772
40773
40774
40775
40776
40777
40778
40779
40780
40781
40782
40783
40784
40785
40786
40787
40788
40789
40790
40791
40792
40793
40794
40795
40796
40797
40798
40799
40800
40801
40802
40803
40804
40805
40806
40807
40808
40809
40810
40811
40812
40813
40814
40815
40816
40817
40818
40819
40820
40821
40822
40823
40824
40825
40826
40827
40828
40829
40830
40831
40832
40833
40834
40835
40836
40837
40838
40839
40840
40841
40842
40843
40844
40845
40846
40847
40848
40849
40850
40851
40852
40853
40854
40855
40856
40857
40858
40859
40860
40861
40862
40863
40864
40865
40866
40867
40868
40869
40870
40871
40872
40873
40874
40875
40876
40877
40878
40879
40880
40881
40882
40883
40884
40885
40886
40887
40888
40889
40890
40891
40892
40893
40894
40895
40896
40897
40898
40899
40900
40901
40902
40903
40904
40905
40906
40907
40908
40909
40910
40911
40912
40913
40914
40915
40916
40917
40918
40919
40920
40921
40922
40923
40924
40925
40926
40927
40928
40929
40930
40931
40932
40933
40934
40935
40936
40937
40938
40939
40940
40941
40942
40943
40944
40945
40946
40947
40948
40949
40950
40951
40952
40953
40954
40955
40956
40957
40958
40959
40960
40961
40962
40963
40964
40965
40966
40967
40968
40969
40970
40971
40972
40973
40974
40975
40976
40977
40978
40979
40980
40981
40982
40983
40984
40985
40986
40987
40988
40989
40990
40991
40992
40993
40994
40995
40996
40997
40998
40999
41000
41001
41002
41003
41004
41005
41006
41007
41008
41009
41010
41011
41012
41013
41014
41015
41016
41017
41018
41019
41020
41021
41022
41023
41024
41025
41026
41027
41028
41029
41030
41031
41032
41033
41034
41035
41036
41037
41038
41039
41040
41041
41042
41043
41044
41045
41046
41047
41048
41049
41050
41051
41052
41053
41054
41055
41056
41057
41058
41059
41060
41061
41062
41063
41064
41065
41066
41067
41068
41069
41070
41071
41072
41073
41074
41075
41076
41077
41078
41079
41080
41081
41082
41083
41084
41085
41086
41087
41088
41089
41090
41091
41092
41093
41094
41095
41096
41097
41098
41099
41100
41101
41102
41103
41104
41105
41106
41107
41108
41109
41110
41111
41112
41113
41114
41115
41116
41117
41118
41119
41120
41121
41122
41123
41124
41125
41126
41127
41128
41129
41130
41131
41132
41133
41134
41135
41136
41137
41138
41139
41140
41141
41142
41143
41144
41145
41146
41147
41148
41149
41150
41151
41152
41153
41154
41155
41156
41157
41158
41159
41160
41161
41162
41163
41164
41165
41166
41167
41168
41169
41170
41171
41172
41173
41174
41175
41176
41177
41178
41179
41180
41181
41182
41183
41184
41185
41186
41187
41188
41189
41190
41191
41192
41193
41194
41195
41196
41197
41198
41199
41200
41201
41202
41203
41204
41205
41206
41207
41208
41209
41210
41211
41212
41213
41214
41215
41216
41217
41218
41219
41220
41221
41222
41223
41224
41225
41226
41227
41228
41229
41230
41231
41232
41233
41234
41235
41236
41237
41238
41239
41240
41241
41242
41243
41244
41245
41246
41247
41248
41249
41250
41251
41252
41253
41254
41255
41256
41257
41258
41259
41260
41261
41262
41263
41264
41265
41266
41267
41268
41269
41270
41271
41272
41273
41274
41275
41276
41277
41278
41279
41280
41281
41282
41283
41284
41285
41286
41287
41288
41289
41290
41291
41292
41293
41294
41295
41296
41297
41298
41299
41300
41301
41302
41303
41304
41305
41306
41307
41308
41309
41310
41311
41312
41313
41314
41315
41316
41317
41318
41319
41320
41321
41322
41323
41324
41325
41326
41327
41328
41329
41330
41331
41332
41333
41334
41335
41336
41337
41338
41339
41340
41341
41342
41343
41344
41345
41346
41347
41348
41349
41350
41351
41352
41353
41354
41355
41356
41357
41358
41359
41360
41361
41362
41363
41364
41365
41366
41367
41368
41369
41370
41371
41372
41373
41374
41375
41376
41377
41378
41379
41380
41381
41382
41383
41384
41385
41386
41387
41388
41389
41390
41391
41392
41393
41394
41395
41396
41397
41398
41399
41400
41401
41402
41403
41404
41405
41406
41407
41408
41409
41410
41411
41412
41413
41414
41415
41416
41417
41418
41419
41420
41421
41422
41423
41424
41425
41426
41427
41428
41429
41430
41431
41432
41433
41434
41435
41436
41437
41438
41439
41440
41441
41442
41443
41444
41445
41446
41447
41448
41449
41450
41451
41452
41453
41454
41455
41456
41457
41458
41459
41460
41461
41462
41463
41464
41465
41466
41467
41468
41469
41470
41471
41472
41473
41474
41475
41476
41477
41478
41479
41480
41481
41482
41483
41484
41485
41486
41487
41488
41489
41490
41491
41492
41493
41494
41495
41496
41497
41498
41499
41500
41501
41502
41503
41504
41505
41506
41507
41508
41509
41510
41511
41512
41513
41514
41515
41516
41517
41518
41519
41520
41521
41522
41523
41524
41525
41526
41527
41528
41529
41530
41531
41532
41533
41534
41535
41536
41537
41538
41539
41540
41541
41542
41543
41544
41545
41546
41547
41548
41549
41550
41551
41552
41553
41554
41555
41556
41557
41558
41559
41560
41561
41562
41563
41564
41565
41566
41567
41568
41569
41570
41571
41572
41573
41574
41575
41576
41577
41578
41579
41580
41581
41582
41583
41584
41585
41586
41587
41588
41589
41590
41591
41592
41593
41594
41595
41596
41597
41598
41599
41600
41601
41602
41603
41604
41605
41606
41607
41608
41609
41610
41611
41612
41613
41614
41615
41616
41617
41618
41619
41620
41621
41622
41623
41624
41625
41626
41627
41628
41629
41630
41631
41632
41633
41634
41635
41636
41637
41638
41639
41640
41641
41642
41643
41644
41645
41646
41647
41648
41649
41650
41651
41652
41653
41654
41655
41656
41657
41658
41659
41660
41661
41662
41663
41664
41665
41666
41667
41668
41669
41670
41671
41672
41673
41674
41675
41676
41677
41678
41679
41680
41681
41682
41683
41684
41685
41686
41687
41688
41689
41690
41691
41692
41693
41694
41695
41696
41697
41698
41699
41700
41701
41702
41703
41704
41705
41706
41707
41708
41709
41710
41711
41712
41713
41714
41715
41716
41717
41718
41719
41720
41721
41722
41723
41724
41725
41726
41727
41728
41729
41730
41731
41732
41733
41734
41735
41736
41737
41738
41739
41740
41741
41742
41743
41744
41745
41746
41747
41748
41749
41750
41751
41752
41753
41754
41755
41756
41757
41758
41759
41760
41761
41762
41763
41764
41765
41766
41767
41768
41769
41770
41771
41772
41773
41774
41775
41776
41777
41778
41779
41780
41781
41782
41783
41784
41785
41786
41787
41788
41789
41790
41791
41792
41793
41794
41795
41796
41797
41798
41799
41800
41801
41802
41803
41804
41805
41806
41807
41808
41809
41810
41811
41812
41813
41814
41815
41816
41817
41818
41819
41820
41821
41822
41823
41824
41825
41826
41827
41828
41829
41830
41831
41832
41833
41834
41835
41836
41837
41838
41839
41840
41841
41842
41843
41844
41845
41846
41847
41848
41849
41850
41851
41852
41853
41854
41855
41856
41857
41858
41859
41860
41861
41862
41863
41864
41865
41866
41867
41868
41869
41870
41871
41872
41873
41874
41875
41876
41877
41878
41879
41880
41881
41882
41883
41884
41885
41886
41887
41888
41889
41890
41891
41892
41893
41894
41895
41896
41897
41898
41899
41900
41901
41902
41903
41904
41905
41906
41907
41908
41909
41910
41911
41912
41913
41914
41915
41916
41917
41918
41919
41920
41921
41922
41923
41924
41925
41926
41927
41928
41929
41930
41931
41932
41933
41934
41935
41936
41937
41938
41939
41940
41941
41942
41943
41944
41945
41946
41947
41948
41949
41950
41951
41952
41953
41954
41955
41956
41957
41958
41959
41960
41961
41962
41963
41964
41965
41966
41967
41968
41969
41970
41971
41972
41973
41974
41975
41976
41977
41978
41979
41980
41981
41982
41983
41984
41985
41986
41987
41988
41989
41990
41991
41992
41993
41994
41995
41996
41997
41998
41999
42000
42001
42002
42003
42004
42005
42006
42007
42008
42009
42010
42011
42012
42013
42014
42015
42016
42017
42018
42019
42020
42021
42022
42023
42024
42025
42026
42027
42028
42029
42030
42031
42032
42033
42034
42035
42036
42037
42038
42039
42040
42041
42042
42043
42044
42045
42046
42047
42048
42049
42050
42051
42052
42053
42054
42055
42056
42057
42058
42059
42060
42061
42062
42063
42064
42065
42066
42067
42068
42069
42070
42071
42072
42073
42074
42075
42076
42077
42078
42079
42080
42081
42082
42083
42084
42085
42086
42087
42088
42089
42090
42091
42092
42093
42094
42095
42096
42097
42098
42099
42100
42101
42102
42103
42104
42105
42106
42107
42108
42109
42110
42111
42112
42113
42114
42115
42116
42117
42118
42119
42120
42121
42122
42123
42124
42125
42126
42127
42128
42129
42130
42131
42132
42133
42134
42135
42136
42137
42138
42139
42140
42141
42142
42143
42144
42145
42146
42147
42148
42149
42150
42151
42152
42153
42154
42155
42156
42157
42158
42159
42160
42161
42162
42163
42164
42165
42166
42167
42168
42169
42170
42171
42172
42173
42174
42175
42176
42177
42178
42179
42180
42181
42182
42183
42184
42185
42186
42187
42188
42189
42190
42191
42192
42193
42194
42195
42196
42197
42198
42199
42200
42201
42202
42203
42204
42205
42206
42207
42208
42209
42210
42211
42212
42213
42214
42215
42216
42217
42218
42219
42220
42221
42222
42223
42224
42225
42226
42227
42228
42229
42230
42231
42232
42233
42234
42235
42236
42237
42238
42239
42240
42241
42242
42243
42244
42245
42246
42247
42248
42249
42250
42251
42252
42253
42254
42255
42256
42257
42258
42259
42260
42261
42262
42263
42264
42265
42266
42267
42268
42269
42270
42271
42272
42273
42274
42275
42276
42277
42278
42279
42280
42281
42282
42283
42284
42285
42286
42287
42288
42289
42290
42291
42292
42293
42294
42295
42296
42297
42298
42299
42300
42301
42302
42303
42304
42305
42306
42307
42308
42309
42310
42311
42312
42313
42314
42315
42316
42317
42318
42319
42320
42321
42322
42323
42324
42325
42326
42327
42328
42329
42330
42331
42332
42333
42334
42335
42336
42337
42338
42339
42340
42341
42342
42343
42344
42345
42346
42347
42348
42349
42350
42351
42352
42353
42354
42355
42356
42357
42358
42359
42360
42361
42362
42363
42364
42365
42366
42367
42368
42369
42370
42371
42372
42373
42374
42375
42376
42377
42378
42379
42380
42381
42382
42383
42384
42385
42386
42387
42388
42389
42390
42391
42392
42393
42394
42395
42396
42397
42398
42399
42400
42401
42402
42403
42404
42405
42406
42407
42408
42409
42410
42411
42412
42413
42414
42415
42416
42417
42418
42419
42420
42421
42422
42423
42424
42425
42426
42427
42428
42429
42430
42431
42432
42433
42434
42435
42436
42437
42438
42439
42440
42441
42442
42443
42444
42445
42446
42447
42448
42449
42450
42451
42452
42453
42454
42455
42456
42457
42458
42459
42460
42461
42462
42463
42464
42465
42466
42467
42468
42469
42470
42471
42472
42473
42474
42475
42476
42477
42478
42479
42480
42481
42482
42483
42484
42485
42486
42487
42488
42489
42490
42491
42492
42493
42494
42495
42496
42497
42498
42499
42500
42501
42502
42503
42504
42505
42506
42507
42508
42509
42510
42511
42512
42513
42514
42515
42516
42517
42518
42519
42520
42521
42522
42523
42524
42525
42526
42527
42528
42529
42530
42531
42532
42533
42534
42535
42536
42537
42538
42539
42540
42541
42542
42543
42544
42545
42546
42547
42548
42549
42550
42551
42552
42553
42554
42555
42556
42557
42558
42559
42560
42561
42562
42563
42564
42565
42566
42567
42568
42569
42570
42571
42572
42573
42574
42575
42576
42577
42578
42579
42580
42581
42582
42583
42584
42585
42586
42587
42588
42589
42590
42591
42592
42593
42594
42595
42596
42597
42598
42599
42600
42601
42602
42603
42604
42605
42606
42607
42608
42609
42610
42611
42612
42613
42614
42615
42616
42617
42618
42619
42620
42621
42622
42623
42624
42625
42626
42627
42628
42629
42630
42631
42632
42633
42634
42635
42636
42637
42638
42639
42640
42641
42642
42643
42644
42645
42646
42647
42648
42649
42650
42651
42652
42653
42654
42655
42656
42657
42658
42659
42660
42661
42662
42663
42664
42665
42666
42667
42668
42669
42670
42671
42672
42673
42674
42675
42676
42677
42678
42679
42680
42681
42682
42683
42684
42685
42686
42687
42688
42689
42690
42691
42692
42693
42694
42695
42696
42697
42698
42699
42700
42701
42702
42703
42704
42705
42706
42707
42708
42709
42710
42711
42712
42713
42714
42715
42716
42717
42718
42719
42720
42721
42722
42723
42724
42725
42726
42727
42728
42729
42730
42731
42732
42733
42734
42735
42736
42737
42738
42739
42740
42741
42742
42743
42744
42745
42746
42747
42748
42749
42750
42751
42752
42753
42754
42755
42756
42757
42758
42759
42760
42761
42762
42763
42764
42765
42766
42767
42768
42769
42770
42771
42772
42773
42774
42775
42776
42777
42778
42779
42780
42781
42782
42783
42784
42785
42786
42787
42788
42789
42790
42791
42792
42793
42794
42795
42796
42797
42798
42799
42800
42801
42802
42803
42804
42805
42806
42807
42808
42809
42810
42811
42812
42813
42814
42815
42816
42817
42818
42819
42820
42821
42822
42823
42824
42825
42826
42827
42828
42829
42830
42831
42832
42833
42834
42835
42836
42837
42838
42839
42840
42841
42842
42843
42844
42845
42846
42847
42848
42849
42850
42851
42852
42853
42854
42855
42856
42857
42858
42859
42860
42861
42862
42863
42864
42865
42866
42867
42868
42869
42870
42871
42872
42873
42874
42875
42876
42877
42878
42879
42880
42881
42882
42883
42884
42885
42886
42887
42888
42889
42890
42891
42892
42893
42894
42895
42896
42897
42898
42899
42900
42901
42902
42903
42904
42905
42906
42907
42908
42909
42910
42911
42912
42913
42914
42915
42916
42917
42918
42919
42920
42921
42922
42923
42924
42925
42926
42927
42928
42929
42930
42931
42932
42933
42934
42935
42936
42937
42938
42939
42940
42941
42942
42943
42944
42945
42946
42947
42948
42949
42950
42951
42952
42953
42954
42955
42956
42957
42958
42959
42960
42961
42962
42963
42964
42965
42966
42967
42968
42969
42970
42971
42972
42973
42974
42975
42976
42977
42978
42979
42980
42981
42982
42983
42984
42985
42986
42987
42988
42989
42990
42991
42992
42993
42994
42995
42996
42997
42998
42999
43000
43001
43002
43003
43004
43005
43006
43007
43008
43009
43010
43011
43012
43013
43014
43015
43016
43017
43018
43019
43020
43021
43022
43023
43024
43025
43026
43027
43028
43029
43030
43031
43032
43033
43034
43035
43036
43037
43038
43039
43040
43041
43042
43043
43044
43045
43046
43047
43048
43049
43050
43051
43052
43053
43054
43055
43056
43057
43058
43059
43060
43061
43062
43063
43064
43065
43066
43067
43068
43069
43070
43071
43072
43073
43074
43075
43076
43077
43078
43079
43080
43081
43082
43083
43084
43085
43086
43087
43088
43089
43090
43091
43092
43093
43094
43095
43096
43097
43098
43099
43100
43101
43102
43103
43104
43105
43106
43107
43108
43109
43110
43111
43112
43113
43114
43115
43116
43117
43118
43119
43120
43121
43122
43123
43124
43125
43126
43127
43128
43129
43130
43131
43132
43133
43134
43135
43136
43137
43138
43139
43140
43141
43142
43143
43144
43145
43146
43147
43148
43149
43150
43151
43152
43153
43154
43155
43156
43157
43158
43159
43160
43161
43162
43163
43164
43165
43166
43167
43168
43169
43170
43171
43172
43173
43174
43175
43176
43177
43178
43179
43180
43181
43182
43183
43184
43185
43186
43187
43188
43189
43190
43191
43192
43193
43194
43195
43196
43197
43198
43199
43200
43201
43202
43203
43204
43205
43206
43207
43208
43209
43210
43211
43212
43213
43214
43215
43216
43217
43218
43219
43220
43221
43222
43223
43224
43225
43226
43227
43228
43229
43230
43231
43232
43233
43234
43235
43236
43237
43238
43239
43240
43241
43242
43243
43244
43245
43246
43247
43248
43249
43250
43251
43252
43253
43254
43255
43256
43257
43258
43259
43260
43261
43262
43263
43264
43265
43266
43267
43268
43269
43270
43271
43272
43273
43274
43275
43276
43277
43278
43279
43280
43281
43282
43283
43284
43285
43286
43287
43288
43289
43290
43291
43292
43293
43294
43295
43296
43297
43298
43299
43300
43301
43302
43303
43304
43305
43306
43307
43308
43309
43310
43311
43312
43313
43314
43315
43316
43317
43318
43319
43320
43321
43322
43323
43324
43325
43326
43327
43328
43329
43330
43331
43332
43333
43334
43335
43336
43337
43338
43339
43340
43341
43342
43343
43344
43345
43346
43347
43348
43349
43350
43351
43352
43353
43354
43355
43356
43357
43358
43359
43360
43361
43362
43363
43364
43365
43366
43367
43368
43369
43370
43371
43372
43373
43374
43375
43376
43377
43378
43379
43380
43381
43382
43383
43384
43385
43386
43387
43388
43389
43390
43391
43392
43393
43394
43395
43396
43397
43398
43399
43400
43401
43402
43403
43404
43405
43406
43407
43408
43409
43410
43411
43412
43413
43414
43415
43416
43417
43418
43419
43420
43421
43422
43423
43424
43425
43426
43427
43428
43429
43430
43431
43432
43433
43434
43435
43436
43437
43438
43439
43440
43441
43442
43443
43444
43445
43446
43447
43448
43449
43450
43451
43452
43453
43454
43455
43456
43457
43458
43459
43460
43461
43462
43463
43464
43465
43466
43467
43468
43469
43470
43471
43472
43473
43474
43475
43476
43477
43478
43479
43480
43481
43482
43483
43484
43485
43486
43487
43488
43489
43490
43491
43492
43493
43494
43495
43496
43497
43498
43499
43500
43501
43502
43503
43504
43505
43506
43507
43508
43509
43510
43511
43512
43513
43514
43515
43516
43517
43518
43519
43520
43521
43522
43523
43524
43525
43526
43527
43528
43529
43530
43531
43532
43533
43534
43535
43536
43537
43538
43539
43540
43541
43542
43543
43544
43545
43546
43547
43548
43549
43550
43551
43552
43553
43554
43555
43556
43557
43558
43559
43560
43561
43562
43563
43564
43565
43566
43567
43568
43569
43570
43571
43572
43573
43574
43575
43576
43577
43578
43579
43580
43581
43582
43583
43584
43585
43586
43587
43588
43589
43590
43591
43592
43593
43594
43595
43596
43597
43598
43599
43600
43601
43602
43603
43604
43605
43606
43607
43608
43609
43610
43611
43612
43613
43614
43615
43616
43617
43618
43619
43620
43621
43622
43623
43624
43625
43626
43627
43628
43629
43630
43631
43632
43633
43634
43635
43636
43637
43638
43639
43640
43641
43642
43643
43644
43645
43646
43647
43648
43649
43650
43651
43652
43653
43654
43655
43656
43657
43658
43659
43660
43661
43662
43663
43664
43665
43666
43667
43668
43669
43670
43671
43672
43673
43674
43675
43676
43677
43678
43679
43680
43681
43682
43683
43684
43685
43686
43687
43688
43689
43690
43691
43692
43693
43694
43695
43696
43697
43698
43699
43700
43701
43702
43703
43704
43705
43706
43707
43708
43709
43710
43711
43712
43713
43714
43715
43716
43717
43718
43719
43720
43721
43722
43723
43724
43725
43726
43727
43728
43729
43730
43731
43732
43733
43734
43735
43736
43737
43738
43739
43740
43741
43742
43743
43744
43745
43746
43747
43748
43749
43750
43751
43752
43753
43754
43755
43756
43757
43758
43759
43760
43761
43762
43763
43764
43765
43766
43767
43768
43769
43770
43771
43772
43773
43774
43775
43776
43777
43778
43779
43780
43781
43782
43783
43784
43785
43786
43787
43788
43789
43790
43791
43792
43793
43794
43795
43796
43797
43798
43799
43800
43801
43802
43803
43804
43805
43806
43807
43808
43809
43810
43811
43812
43813
43814
43815
43816
43817
43818
43819
43820
43821
43822
43823
43824
43825
43826
43827
43828
43829
43830
43831
43832
43833
43834
43835
43836
43837
43838
43839
43840
43841
43842
43843
43844
43845
43846
43847
43848
43849
43850
43851
43852
43853
43854
43855
43856
43857
43858
43859
43860
43861
43862
43863
43864
43865
43866
43867
43868
43869
43870
43871
43872
43873
43874
43875
43876
43877
43878
43879
43880
43881
43882
43883
43884
43885
43886
43887
43888
43889
43890
43891
43892
43893
43894
43895
43896
43897
43898
43899
43900
43901
43902
43903
43904
43905
43906
43907
43908
43909
43910
43911
43912
43913
43914
43915
43916
43917
43918
43919
43920
43921
43922
43923
43924
43925
43926
43927
43928
43929
43930
43931
43932
43933
43934
43935
43936
43937
43938
43939
43940
43941
43942
43943
43944
43945
43946
43947
43948
43949
43950
43951
43952
43953
43954
43955
43956
43957
43958
43959
43960
43961
43962
43963
43964
43965
43966
43967
43968
43969
43970
43971
43972
43973
43974
43975
43976
43977
43978
43979
43980
43981
43982
43983
43984
43985
43986
43987
43988
43989
43990
43991
43992
43993
43994
43995
43996
43997
43998
43999
44000
44001
44002
44003
44004
44005
44006
44007
44008
44009
44010
44011
44012
44013
44014
44015
44016
44017
44018
44019
44020
44021
44022
44023
44024
44025
44026
44027
44028
44029
44030
44031
44032
44033
44034
44035
44036
44037
44038
44039
44040
44041
44042
44043
44044
44045
44046
44047
44048
44049
44050
44051
44052
44053
44054
44055
44056
44057
44058
44059
44060
44061
44062
44063
44064
44065
44066
44067
44068
44069
44070
44071
44072
44073
44074
44075
44076
44077
44078
44079
44080
44081
44082
44083
44084
44085
44086
44087
44088
44089
44090
44091
44092
44093
44094
44095
44096
44097
44098
44099
44100
44101
44102
44103
44104
44105
44106
44107
44108
44109
44110
44111
44112
44113
44114
44115
44116
44117
44118
44119
44120
44121
44122
44123
44124
44125
44126
44127
44128
44129
44130
44131
44132
44133
44134
44135
44136
44137
44138
44139
44140
44141
44142
44143
44144
44145
44146
44147
44148
44149
44150
44151
44152
44153
44154
44155
44156
44157
44158
44159
44160
44161
44162
44163
44164
44165
44166
44167
44168
44169
44170
44171
44172
44173
44174
44175
44176
44177
44178
44179
44180
44181
44182
44183
44184
44185
44186
44187
44188
44189
44190
44191
44192
44193
44194
44195
44196
44197
44198
44199
44200
44201
44202
44203
44204
44205
44206
44207
44208
44209
44210
44211
44212
44213
44214
44215
44216
44217
44218
44219
44220
44221
44222
44223
44224
44225
44226
44227
44228
44229
44230
44231
44232
44233
44234
44235
44236
44237
44238
44239
44240
44241
44242
44243
44244
44245
44246
44247
44248
44249
44250
44251
44252
44253
44254
44255
44256
44257
44258
44259
44260
44261
44262
44263
44264
44265
44266
44267
44268
44269
44270
44271
44272
44273
44274
44275
44276
44277
44278
44279
44280
44281
44282
44283
44284
44285
44286
44287
44288
44289
44290
44291
44292
44293
44294
44295
44296
44297
44298
44299
44300
44301
44302
44303
44304
44305
44306
44307
44308
44309
44310
44311
44312
44313
44314
44315
44316
44317
44318
44319
44320
44321
44322
44323
44324
44325
44326
44327
44328
44329
44330
44331
44332
44333
44334
44335
44336
44337
44338
44339
44340
44341
44342
44343
44344
44345
44346
44347
44348
44349
44350
44351
44352
44353
44354
44355
44356
44357
44358
44359
44360
44361
44362
44363
44364
44365
44366
44367
44368
44369
44370
44371
44372
44373
44374
44375
44376
44377
44378
44379
44380
44381
44382
44383
44384
44385
44386
44387
44388
44389
44390
44391
44392
44393
44394
44395
44396
44397
44398
44399
44400
44401
44402
44403
44404
44405
44406
44407
44408
44409
44410
44411
44412
44413
44414
44415
44416
44417
44418
44419
44420
44421
44422
44423
44424
44425
44426
44427
44428
44429
44430
44431
44432
44433
44434
44435
44436
44437
44438
44439
44440
44441
44442
44443
44444
44445
44446
44447
44448
44449
44450
44451
44452
44453
44454
44455
44456
44457
44458
44459
44460
44461
44462
44463
44464
44465
44466
44467
44468
44469
44470
44471
44472
44473
44474
44475
44476
44477
44478
44479
44480
44481
44482
44483
44484
44485
44486
44487
44488
44489
44490
44491
44492
44493
44494
44495
44496
44497
44498
44499
44500
44501
44502
44503
44504
44505
44506
44507
44508
44509
44510
44511
44512
44513
44514
44515
44516
44517
44518
44519
44520
44521
44522
44523
44524
44525
44526
44527
44528
44529
44530
44531
44532
44533
44534
44535
44536
44537
44538
44539
44540
44541
44542
44543
44544
44545
44546
44547
44548
44549
44550
44551
44552
44553
44554
44555
44556
44557
44558
44559
44560
44561
44562
44563
44564
44565
44566
44567
44568
44569
44570
44571
44572
44573
44574
44575
44576
44577
44578
44579
44580
44581
44582
44583
44584
44585
44586
44587
44588
44589
44590
44591
44592
44593
44594
44595
44596
44597
44598
44599
44600
44601
44602
44603
44604
44605
44606
44607
44608
44609
44610
44611
44612
44613
44614
44615
44616
44617
44618
44619
44620
44621
44622
44623
44624
44625
44626
44627
44628
44629
44630
44631
44632
44633
44634
44635
44636
44637
44638
44639
44640
44641
44642
44643
44644
44645
44646
44647
44648
44649
44650
44651
44652
44653
44654
44655
44656
44657
44658
44659
44660
44661
44662
44663
44664
44665
44666
44667
44668
44669
44670
44671
44672
44673
44674
44675
44676
44677
44678
44679
44680
44681
44682
44683
44684
44685
44686
44687
44688
44689
44690
44691
44692
44693
44694
44695
44696
44697
44698
44699
44700
44701
44702
44703
44704
44705
44706
44707
44708
44709
44710
44711
44712
44713
44714
44715
44716
44717
44718
44719
44720
44721
44722
44723
44724
44725
44726
44727
44728
44729
44730
44731
44732
44733
44734
44735
44736
44737
44738
44739
44740
44741
44742
44743
44744
44745
44746
44747
44748
44749
44750
44751
44752
44753
44754
44755
44756
44757
44758
44759
44760
44761
44762
44763
44764
44765
44766
44767
44768
44769
44770
44771
44772
44773
44774
44775
44776
44777
44778
44779
44780
44781
44782
44783
44784
44785
44786
44787
44788
44789
44790
44791
44792
44793
44794
44795
44796
44797
44798
44799
44800
44801
44802
44803
44804
44805
44806
44807
44808
44809
44810
44811
44812
44813
44814
44815
44816
44817
44818
44819
44820
44821
44822
44823
44824
44825
44826
44827
44828
44829
44830
44831
44832
44833
44834
44835
44836
44837
44838
44839
44840
44841
44842
44843
44844
44845
44846
44847
44848
44849
44850
44851
44852
44853
44854
44855
44856
44857
44858
44859
44860
44861
44862
44863
44864
44865
44866
44867
44868
44869
44870
44871
44872
44873
44874
44875
44876
44877
44878
44879
44880
44881
44882
44883
44884
44885
44886
44887
44888
44889
44890
44891
44892
44893
44894
44895
44896
44897
44898
44899
44900
44901
44902
44903
44904
44905
44906
44907
44908
44909
44910
44911
44912
44913
44914
44915
44916
44917
44918
44919
44920
44921
44922
44923
44924
44925
44926
44927
44928
44929
44930
44931
44932
44933
44934
44935
44936
44937
44938
44939
44940
44941
44942
44943
44944
44945
44946
44947
44948
44949
44950
44951
44952
44953
44954
44955
44956
44957
44958
44959
44960
44961
44962
44963
44964
44965
44966
44967
44968
44969
44970
44971
44972
44973
44974
44975
44976
44977
44978
44979
44980
44981
44982
44983
44984
44985
44986
44987
44988
44989
44990
44991
44992
44993
44994
44995
44996
44997
44998
44999
45000
45001
45002
45003
45004
45005
45006
45007
45008
45009
45010
45011
45012
45013
45014
45015
45016
45017
45018
45019
45020
45021
45022
45023
45024
45025
45026
45027
45028
45029
45030
45031
45032
45033
45034
45035
45036
45037
45038
45039
45040
45041
45042
45043
45044
45045
45046
45047
45048
45049
45050
45051
45052
45053
45054
45055
45056
45057
45058
45059
45060
45061
45062
45063
45064
45065
45066
45067
45068
45069
45070
45071
45072
45073
45074
45075
45076
45077
45078
45079
45080
45081
45082
45083
45084
45085
45086
45087
45088
45089
45090
45091
45092
45093
45094
45095
45096
45097
45098
45099
45100
45101
45102
45103
45104
45105
45106
45107
45108
45109
45110
45111
45112
45113
45114
45115
45116
45117
45118
45119
45120
45121
45122
45123
45124
45125
45126
45127
45128
45129
45130
45131
45132
45133
45134
45135
45136
45137
45138
45139
45140
45141
45142
45143
45144
45145
45146
45147
45148
45149
45150
45151
45152
45153
45154
45155
45156
45157
45158
45159
45160
45161
45162
45163
45164
45165
45166
45167
45168
45169
45170
45171
45172
45173
45174
45175
45176
45177
45178
45179
45180
45181
45182
45183
45184
45185
45186
45187
45188
45189
45190
45191
45192
45193
45194
45195
45196
45197
45198
45199
45200
45201
45202
45203
45204
45205
45206
45207
45208
45209
45210
45211
45212
45213
45214
45215
45216
45217
45218
45219
45220
45221
45222
45223
45224
45225
45226
45227
45228
45229
45230
45231
45232
45233
45234
45235
45236
45237
45238
45239
45240
45241
45242
45243
45244
45245
45246
45247
45248
45249
45250
45251
45252
45253
45254
45255
45256
45257
45258
45259
45260
45261
45262
45263
45264
45265
45266
45267
45268
45269
45270
45271
45272
45273
45274
45275
45276
45277
45278
45279
45280
45281
45282
45283
45284
45285
45286
45287
45288
45289
45290
45291
45292
45293
45294
45295
45296
45297
45298
45299
45300
45301
45302
45303
45304
45305
45306
45307
45308
45309
45310
45311
45312
45313
45314
45315
45316
45317
45318
45319
45320
45321
45322
45323
45324
45325
45326
45327
45328
45329
45330
45331
45332
45333
45334
45335
45336
45337
45338
45339
45340
45341
45342
45343
45344
45345
45346
45347
45348
45349
45350
45351
45352
45353
45354
45355
45356
45357
45358
45359
45360
45361
45362
45363
45364
45365
45366
45367
45368
45369
45370
45371
45372
45373
45374
45375
45376
45377
45378
45379
45380
45381
45382
45383
45384
45385
45386
45387
45388
45389
45390
45391
45392
45393
45394
45395
45396
45397
45398
45399
45400
45401
45402
45403
45404
45405
45406
45407
45408
45409
45410
45411
45412
45413
45414
45415
45416
45417
45418
45419
45420
45421
45422
45423
45424
45425
45426
45427
45428
45429
45430
45431
45432
45433
45434
45435
45436
45437
45438
45439
45440
45441
45442
45443
45444
45445
45446
45447
45448
45449
45450
45451
45452
45453
45454
45455
45456
45457
45458
45459
45460
45461
45462
45463
45464
45465
45466
45467
45468
45469
45470
45471
45472
45473
45474
45475
45476
45477
45478
45479
45480
45481
45482
45483
45484
45485
45486
45487
45488
45489
45490
45491
45492
45493
45494
45495
45496
45497
45498
45499
45500
45501
45502
45503
45504
45505
45506
45507
45508
45509
45510
45511
45512
45513
45514
45515
45516
45517
45518
45519
45520
45521
45522
45523
45524
45525
45526
45527
45528
45529
45530
45531
45532
45533
45534
45535
45536
45537
45538
45539
45540
45541
45542
45543
45544
45545
45546
45547
45548
45549
45550
45551
45552
45553
45554
45555
45556
45557
45558
45559
45560
45561
45562
45563
45564
45565
45566
45567
45568
45569
45570
45571
45572
45573
45574
45575
45576
45577
45578
45579
45580
45581
45582
45583
45584
45585
45586
45587
45588
45589
45590
45591
45592
45593
45594
45595
45596
45597
45598
45599
45600
45601
45602
45603
45604
45605
45606
45607
45608
45609
45610
45611
45612
45613
45614
45615
45616
45617
45618
45619
45620
45621
45622
45623
45624
45625
45626
45627
45628
45629
45630
45631
45632
45633
45634
45635
45636
45637
45638
45639
45640
45641
45642
45643
45644
45645
45646
45647
45648
45649
45650
45651
45652
45653
45654
45655
45656
45657
45658
45659
45660
45661
45662
45663
45664
45665
45666
45667
45668
45669
45670
45671
45672
45673
45674
45675
45676
45677
45678
45679
45680
45681
45682
45683
45684
45685
45686
45687
45688
45689
45690
45691
45692
45693
45694
45695
45696
45697
45698
45699
45700
45701
45702
45703
45704
45705
45706
45707
45708
45709
45710
45711
45712
45713
45714
45715
45716
45717
45718
45719
45720
45721
45722
45723
45724
45725
45726
45727
45728
45729
45730
45731
45732
45733
45734
45735
45736
45737
45738
45739
45740
45741
45742
45743
45744
45745
45746
45747
45748
45749
45750
45751
45752
45753
45754
45755
45756
45757
45758
45759
45760
45761
45762
45763
45764
45765
45766
45767
45768
45769
45770
45771
45772
45773
45774
45775
45776
45777
45778
45779
45780
45781
45782
45783
45784
45785
45786
45787
45788
45789
45790
45791
45792
45793
45794
45795
45796
45797
45798
45799
45800
45801
45802
45803
45804
45805
45806
45807
45808
45809
45810
45811
45812
45813
45814
45815
45816
45817
45818
45819
45820
45821
45822
45823
45824
45825
45826
45827
45828
45829
45830
45831
45832
45833
45834
45835
45836
45837
45838
45839
45840
45841
45842
45843
45844
45845
45846
45847
45848
45849
45850
45851
45852
45853
45854
45855
45856
45857
45858
45859
45860
45861
45862
45863
45864
45865
45866
45867
45868
45869
45870
45871
45872
45873
45874
45875
45876
45877
45878
45879
45880
45881
45882
45883
45884
45885
45886
45887
45888
45889
45890
45891
45892
45893
45894
45895
45896
45897
45898
45899
45900
45901
45902
45903
45904
45905
45906
45907
45908
45909
45910
45911
45912
45913
45914
45915
45916
45917
45918
45919
45920
45921
45922
45923
45924
45925
45926
45927
45928
45929
45930
45931
45932
45933
45934
45935
45936
45937
45938
45939
45940
45941
45942
45943
45944
45945
45946
45947
45948
45949
45950
45951
45952
45953
45954
45955
45956
45957
45958
45959
45960
45961
45962
45963
45964
45965
45966
45967
45968
45969
45970
45971
45972
45973
45974
45975
45976
45977
45978
45979
45980
45981
45982
45983
45984
45985
45986
45987
45988
45989
45990
45991
45992
45993
45994
45995
45996
45997
45998
45999
46000
46001
46002
46003
46004
46005
46006
46007
46008
46009
46010
46011
46012
46013
46014
46015
46016
46017
46018
46019
46020
46021
46022
46023
46024
46025
46026
46027
46028
46029
46030
46031
46032
46033
46034
46035
46036
46037
46038
46039
46040
46041
46042
46043
46044
46045
46046
46047
46048
46049
46050
46051
46052
46053
46054
46055
46056
46057
46058
46059
46060
46061
46062
46063
46064
46065
46066
46067
46068
46069
46070
46071
46072
46073
46074
46075
46076
46077
46078
46079
46080
46081
46082
46083
46084
46085
46086
46087
46088
46089
46090
46091
46092
46093
46094
46095
46096
46097
46098
46099
46100
46101
46102
46103
46104
46105
46106
46107
46108
46109
46110
46111
46112
46113
46114
46115
46116
46117
46118
46119
46120
46121
46122
46123
46124
46125
46126
46127
46128
46129
46130
46131
46132
46133
46134
46135
46136
46137
46138
46139
46140
46141
46142
46143
46144
46145
46146
46147
46148
46149
46150
46151
46152
46153
46154
46155
46156
46157
46158
46159
46160
46161
46162
46163
46164
46165
46166
46167
46168
46169
46170
46171
46172
46173
46174
46175
46176
46177
46178
46179
46180
46181
46182
46183
46184
46185
46186
46187
46188
46189
46190
46191
46192
46193
46194
46195
46196
46197
46198
46199
46200
46201
46202
46203
46204
46205
46206
46207
46208
46209
46210
46211
46212
46213
46214
46215
46216
46217
46218
46219
46220
46221
46222
46223
46224
46225
46226
46227
46228
46229
46230
46231
46232
46233
46234
46235
46236
46237
46238
46239
46240
46241
46242
46243
46244
46245
46246
46247
46248
46249
46250
46251
46252
46253
46254
46255
46256
46257
46258
46259
46260
46261
46262
46263
46264
46265
46266
46267
46268
46269
46270
46271
46272
46273
46274
46275
46276
46277
46278
46279
46280
46281
46282
46283
46284
46285
46286
46287
46288
46289
46290
46291
46292
46293
46294
46295
46296
46297
46298
46299
46300
46301
46302
46303
46304
46305
46306
46307
46308
46309
46310
46311
46312
46313
46314
46315
46316
46317
46318
46319
46320
46321
46322
46323
46324
46325
46326
46327
46328
46329
46330
46331
46332
46333
46334
46335
46336
46337
46338
46339
46340
46341
46342
46343
46344
46345
46346
46347
46348
46349
46350
46351
46352
46353
46354
46355
46356
46357
46358
46359
46360
46361
46362
46363
46364
46365
46366
46367
46368
46369
46370
46371
46372
46373
46374
46375
46376
46377
46378
46379
46380
46381
46382
46383
46384
46385
46386
46387
46388
46389
46390
46391
46392
46393
46394
46395
46396
46397
46398
46399
46400
46401
46402
46403
46404
46405
46406
46407
46408
46409
46410
46411
46412
46413
46414
46415
46416
46417
46418
46419
46420
46421
46422
46423
46424
46425
46426
46427
46428
46429
46430
46431
46432
46433
46434
46435
46436
46437
46438
46439
46440
46441
46442
46443
46444
46445
46446
46447
46448
46449
46450
46451
46452
46453
46454
46455
46456
46457
46458
46459
46460
46461
46462
46463
46464
46465
46466
46467
46468
46469
46470
46471
46472
46473
46474
46475
46476
46477
46478
46479
46480
46481
46482
46483
46484
46485
46486
46487
46488
46489
46490
46491
46492
46493
46494
46495
46496
46497
46498
46499
46500
46501
46502
46503
46504
46505
46506
46507
46508
46509
46510
46511
46512
46513
46514
46515
46516
46517
46518
46519
46520
46521
46522
46523
46524
46525
46526
46527
46528
46529
46530
46531
46532
46533
46534
46535
46536
46537
46538
46539
46540
46541
46542
46543
46544
46545
46546
46547
46548
46549
46550
46551
46552
46553
46554
46555
46556
46557
46558
46559
46560
46561
46562
46563
46564
46565
46566
46567
46568
46569
46570
46571
46572
46573
46574
46575
46576
46577
46578
46579
46580
46581
46582
46583
46584
46585
46586
46587
46588
46589
46590
46591
46592
46593
46594
46595
46596
46597
46598
46599
46600
46601
46602
46603
46604
46605
46606
46607
46608
46609
46610
46611
46612
46613
46614
46615
46616
46617
46618
46619
46620
46621
46622
46623
46624
46625
46626
46627
46628
46629
46630
46631
46632
46633
46634
46635
46636
46637
46638
46639
46640
46641
46642
46643
46644
46645
46646
46647
46648
46649
46650
46651
46652
46653
46654
46655
46656
46657
46658
46659
46660
46661
46662
46663
46664
46665
46666
46667
46668
46669
46670
46671
46672
46673
46674
46675
46676
46677
46678
46679
46680
46681
46682
46683
46684
46685
46686
46687
46688
46689
46690
46691
46692
46693
46694
46695
46696
46697
46698
46699
46700
46701
46702
46703
46704
46705
46706
46707
46708
46709
46710
46711
46712
46713
46714
46715
46716
46717
46718
46719
46720
46721
46722
46723
46724
46725
46726
46727
46728
46729
46730
46731
46732
46733
46734
46735
46736
46737
46738
46739
46740
46741
46742
46743
46744
46745
46746
46747
46748
46749
46750
46751
46752
46753
46754
46755
46756
46757
46758
46759
46760
46761
46762
46763
46764
46765
46766
46767
46768
46769
46770
46771
46772
46773
46774
46775
46776
46777
46778
46779
46780
46781
46782
46783
46784
46785
46786
46787
46788
46789
46790
46791
46792
46793
46794
46795
46796
46797
46798
46799
46800
46801
46802
46803
46804
46805
46806
46807
46808
46809
46810
46811
46812
46813
46814
46815
46816
46817
46818
46819
46820
46821
46822
46823
46824
46825
46826
46827
46828
46829
46830
46831
46832
46833
46834
46835
46836
46837
46838
46839
46840
46841
46842
46843
46844
46845
46846
46847
46848
46849
46850
46851
46852
46853
46854
46855
46856
46857
46858
46859
46860
46861
46862
46863
46864
46865
46866
46867
46868
46869
46870
46871
46872
46873
46874
46875
46876
46877
46878
46879
46880
46881
46882
46883
46884
46885
46886
46887
46888
46889
46890
46891
46892
46893
46894
46895
46896
46897
46898
46899
46900
46901
46902
46903
46904
46905
46906
46907
46908
46909
46910
46911
46912
46913
46914
46915
46916
46917
46918
46919
46920
46921
46922
46923
46924
46925
46926
46927
46928
46929
46930
46931
46932
46933
46934
46935
46936
46937
46938
46939
46940
46941
46942
46943
46944
46945
46946
46947
46948
46949
46950
46951
46952
46953
46954
46955
46956
46957
46958
46959
46960
46961
46962
46963
46964
46965
46966
46967
46968
46969
46970
46971
46972
46973
46974
46975
46976
46977
46978
46979
46980
46981
46982
46983
46984
46985
46986
46987
46988
46989
46990
46991
46992
46993
46994
46995
46996
46997
46998
46999
47000
47001
47002
47003
47004
47005
47006
47007
47008
47009
47010
47011
47012
47013
47014
47015
47016
47017
47018
47019
47020
47021
47022
47023
47024
47025
47026
47027
47028
47029
47030
47031
47032
47033
47034
47035
47036
47037
47038
47039
47040
47041
47042
47043
47044
47045
47046
47047
47048
47049
47050
47051
47052
47053
47054
47055
47056
47057
47058
47059
47060
47061
47062
47063
47064
47065
47066
47067
47068
47069
47070
47071
47072
47073
47074
47075
47076
47077
47078
47079
47080
47081
47082
47083
47084
47085
47086
47087
47088
47089
47090
47091
47092
47093
47094
47095
47096
47097
47098
47099
47100
47101
47102
47103
47104
47105
47106
47107
47108
47109
47110
47111
47112
47113
47114
47115
47116
47117
47118
47119
47120
47121
47122
47123
47124
47125
47126
47127
47128
47129
47130
47131
47132
47133
47134
47135
47136
47137
47138
47139
47140
47141
47142
47143
47144
47145
47146
47147
47148
47149
47150
47151
47152
47153
47154
47155
47156
47157
47158
47159
47160
47161
47162
47163
47164
47165
47166
47167
47168
47169
47170
47171
47172
47173
47174
47175
47176
47177
47178
47179
47180
47181
47182
47183
47184
47185
47186
47187
47188
47189
47190
47191
47192
47193
47194
47195
47196
47197
47198
47199
47200
47201
47202
47203
47204
47205
47206
47207
47208
47209
47210
47211
47212
47213
47214
47215
47216
47217
47218
47219
47220
47221
47222
47223
47224
47225
47226
47227
47228
47229
47230
47231
47232
47233
47234
47235
47236
47237
47238
47239
47240
47241
47242
47243
47244
47245
47246
47247
47248
47249
47250
47251
47252
47253
47254
47255
47256
47257
47258
47259
47260
47261
47262
47263
47264
47265
47266
47267
47268
47269
47270
47271
47272
47273
47274
47275
47276
47277
47278
47279
47280
47281
47282
47283
47284
47285
47286
47287
47288
47289
47290
47291
47292
47293
47294
47295
47296
47297
47298
47299
47300
47301
47302
47303
47304
47305
47306
47307
47308
47309
47310
47311
47312
47313
47314
47315
47316
47317
47318
47319
47320
47321
47322
47323
47324
47325
47326
47327
47328
47329
47330
47331
47332
47333
47334
47335
47336
47337
47338
47339
47340
47341
47342
47343
47344
47345
47346
47347
47348
47349
47350
47351
47352
47353
47354
47355
47356
47357
47358
47359
47360
47361
47362
47363
47364
47365
47366
47367
47368
47369
47370
47371
47372
47373
47374
47375
47376
47377
47378
47379
47380
47381
47382
47383
47384
47385
47386
47387
47388
47389
47390
47391
47392
47393
47394
47395
47396
47397
47398
47399
47400
47401
47402
47403
47404
47405
47406
47407
47408
47409
47410
47411
47412
47413
47414
47415
47416
47417
47418
47419
47420
47421
47422
47423
47424
47425
47426
47427
47428
47429
47430
47431
47432
47433
47434
47435
47436
47437
47438
47439
47440
47441
47442
47443
47444
47445
47446
47447
47448
47449
47450
47451
47452
47453
47454
47455
47456
47457
47458
47459
47460
47461
47462
47463
47464
47465
47466
47467
47468
47469
47470
47471
47472
47473
47474
47475
47476
47477
47478
47479
47480
47481
47482
47483
47484
47485
47486
47487
47488
47489
47490
47491
47492
47493
47494
47495
47496
47497
47498
47499
47500
47501
47502
47503
47504
47505
47506
47507
47508
47509
47510
47511
47512
47513
47514
47515
47516
47517
47518
47519
47520
47521
47522
47523
47524
47525
47526
47527
47528
47529
47530
47531
47532
47533
47534
47535
47536
47537
47538
47539
47540
47541
47542
47543
47544
47545
47546
47547
47548
47549
47550
47551
47552
47553
47554
47555
47556
47557
47558
47559
47560
47561
47562
47563
47564
47565
47566
47567
47568
47569
47570
47571
47572
47573
47574
47575
47576
47577
47578
47579
47580
47581
47582
47583
47584
47585
47586
47587
47588
47589
47590
47591
47592
47593
47594
47595
47596
47597
47598
47599
47600
47601
47602
47603
47604
47605
47606
47607
47608
47609
47610
47611
47612
47613
47614
47615
47616
47617
47618
47619
47620
47621
47622
47623
47624
47625
47626
47627
47628
47629
47630
47631
47632
47633
47634
47635
47636
47637
47638
47639
47640
47641
47642
47643
47644
47645
47646
47647
47648
47649
47650
47651
47652
47653
47654
47655
47656
47657
47658
47659
47660
47661
47662
47663
47664
47665
47666
47667
47668
47669
47670
47671
47672
47673
47674
47675
47676
47677
47678
47679
47680
47681
47682
47683
47684
47685
47686
47687
47688
47689
47690
47691
47692
47693
47694
47695
47696
47697
47698
47699
47700
47701
47702
47703
47704
47705
47706
47707
47708
47709
47710
47711
47712
47713
47714
47715
47716
47717
47718
47719
47720
47721
47722
47723
47724
47725
47726
47727
47728
47729
47730
47731
47732
47733
47734
47735
47736
47737
47738
47739
47740
47741
47742
47743
47744
47745
47746
47747
47748
47749
47750
47751
47752
47753
47754
47755
47756
47757
47758
47759
47760
47761
47762
47763
47764
47765
47766
47767
47768
47769
47770
47771
47772
47773
47774
47775
47776
47777
47778
47779
47780
47781
47782
47783
47784
47785
47786
47787
47788
47789
47790
47791
47792
47793
47794
47795
47796
47797
47798
47799
47800
47801
47802
47803
47804
47805
47806
47807
47808
47809
47810
47811
47812
47813
47814
47815
47816
47817
47818
47819
47820
47821
47822
47823
47824
47825
47826
47827
47828
47829
47830
47831
47832
47833
47834
47835
47836
47837
47838
47839
47840
47841
47842
47843
47844
47845
47846
47847
47848
47849
47850
47851
47852
47853
47854
47855
47856
47857
47858
47859
47860
47861
47862
47863
47864
47865
47866
47867
47868
47869
47870
47871
47872
47873
47874
47875
47876
47877
47878
47879
47880
47881
47882
47883
47884
47885
47886
47887
47888
47889
47890
47891
47892
47893
47894
47895
47896
47897
47898
47899
47900
47901
47902
47903
47904
47905
47906
47907
47908
47909
47910
47911
47912
47913
47914
47915
47916
47917
47918
47919
47920
47921
47922
47923
47924
47925
47926
47927
47928
47929
47930
47931
47932
47933
47934
47935
47936
47937
47938
47939
47940
47941
47942
47943
47944
47945
47946
47947
47948
47949
47950
47951
47952
47953
47954
47955
47956
47957
47958
47959
47960
47961
47962
47963
47964
47965
47966
47967
47968
47969
47970
47971
47972
47973
47974
47975
47976
47977
47978
47979
47980
47981
47982
47983
47984
47985
47986
47987
47988
47989
47990
47991
47992
47993
47994
47995
47996
47997
47998
47999
48000
48001
48002
48003
48004
48005
48006
48007
48008
48009
48010
48011
48012
48013
48014
48015
48016
48017
48018
48019
48020
48021
48022
48023
48024
48025
48026
48027
48028
48029
48030
48031
48032
48033
48034
48035
48036
48037
48038
48039
48040
48041
48042
48043
48044
48045
48046
48047
48048
48049
48050
48051
48052
48053
48054
48055
48056
48057
48058
48059
48060
48061
48062
48063
48064
48065
48066
48067
48068
48069
48070
48071
48072
48073
48074
48075
48076
48077
48078
48079
48080
48081
48082
48083
48084
48085
48086
48087
48088
48089
48090
48091
48092
48093
48094
48095
48096
48097
48098
48099
48100
48101
48102
48103
48104
48105
48106
48107
48108
48109
48110
48111
48112
48113
48114
48115
48116
48117
48118
48119
48120
48121
48122
48123
48124
48125
48126
48127
48128
48129
48130
48131
48132
48133
48134
48135
48136
48137
48138
48139
48140
48141
48142
48143
48144
48145
48146
48147
48148
48149
48150
48151
48152
48153
48154
48155
48156
48157
48158
48159
48160
48161
48162
48163
48164
48165
48166
48167
48168
48169
48170
48171
48172
48173
48174
48175
48176
48177
48178
48179
48180
48181
48182
48183
48184
48185
48186
48187
48188
48189
48190
48191
48192
48193
48194
48195
48196
48197
48198
48199
48200
48201
48202
48203
48204
48205
48206
48207
48208
48209
48210
48211
48212
48213
48214
48215
48216
48217
48218
48219
48220
48221
48222
48223
48224
48225
48226
48227
48228
48229
48230
48231
48232
48233
48234
48235
48236
48237
48238
48239
48240
48241
48242
48243
48244
48245
48246
48247
48248
48249
48250
48251
48252
48253
48254
48255
48256
48257
48258
48259
48260
48261
48262
48263
48264
48265
48266
48267
48268
48269
48270
48271
48272
48273
48274
48275
48276
48277
48278
48279
48280
48281
48282
48283
48284
48285
48286
48287
48288
48289
48290
48291
48292
48293
48294
48295
48296
48297
48298
48299
48300
48301
48302
48303
48304
48305
48306
48307
48308
48309
48310
48311
48312
48313
48314
48315
48316
48317
48318
48319
48320
48321
48322
48323
48324
48325
48326
48327
48328
48329
48330
48331
48332
48333
48334
48335
48336
48337
48338
48339
48340
48341
48342
48343
48344
48345
48346
48347
48348
48349
48350
48351
48352
48353
48354
48355
48356
48357
48358
48359
48360
48361
48362
48363
48364
48365
48366
48367
48368
48369
48370
48371
48372
48373
48374
48375
48376
48377
48378
48379
48380
48381
48382
48383
48384
48385
48386
48387
48388
48389
48390
48391
48392
48393
48394
48395
48396
48397
48398
48399
48400
48401
48402
48403
48404
48405
48406
48407
48408
48409
48410
48411
48412
48413
48414
48415
48416
48417
48418
48419
48420
48421
48422
48423
48424
48425
48426
48427
48428
48429
48430
48431
48432
48433
48434
48435
48436
48437
48438
48439
48440
48441
48442
48443
48444
48445
48446
48447
48448
48449
48450
48451
48452
48453
48454
48455
48456
48457
48458
48459
48460
48461
48462
48463
48464
48465
48466
48467
48468
48469
48470
48471
48472
48473
48474
48475
48476
48477
48478
48479
48480
48481
48482
48483
48484
48485
48486
48487
48488
48489
48490
48491
48492
48493
48494
48495
48496
48497
48498
48499
48500
48501
48502
48503
48504
48505
48506
48507
48508
48509
48510
48511
48512
48513
48514
48515
48516
48517
48518
48519
48520
48521
48522
48523
48524
48525
48526
48527
48528
48529
48530
48531
48532
48533
48534
48535
48536
48537
48538
48539
48540
48541
48542
48543
48544
48545
48546
48547
48548
48549
48550
48551
48552
48553
48554
48555
48556
48557
48558
48559
48560
48561
48562
48563
48564
48565
48566
48567
48568
48569
48570
48571
48572
48573
48574
48575
48576
48577
48578
48579
48580
48581
48582
48583
48584
48585
48586
48587
48588
48589
48590
48591
48592
48593
48594
48595
48596
48597
48598
48599
48600
48601
48602
48603
48604
48605
48606
48607
48608
48609
48610
48611
48612
48613
48614
48615
48616
48617
48618
48619
48620
48621
48622
48623
48624
48625
48626
48627
48628
48629
48630
48631
48632
48633
48634
48635
48636
48637
48638
48639
48640
48641
48642
48643
48644
48645
48646
48647
48648
48649
48650
48651
48652
48653
48654
48655
48656
48657
48658
48659
48660
48661
48662
48663
48664
48665
48666
48667
48668
48669
48670
48671
48672
48673
48674
48675
48676
48677
48678
48679
48680
48681
48682
48683
48684
48685
48686
48687
48688
48689
48690
48691
48692
48693
48694
48695
48696
48697
48698
48699
48700
48701
48702
48703
48704
48705
48706
48707
48708
48709
48710
48711
48712
48713
48714
48715
48716
48717
48718
48719
48720
48721
48722
48723
48724
48725
48726
48727
48728
48729
48730
48731
48732
48733
48734
48735
48736
48737
48738
48739
48740
48741
48742
48743
48744
48745
48746
48747
48748
48749
48750
48751
48752
48753
48754
48755
48756
48757
48758
48759
48760
48761
48762
48763
48764
48765
48766
48767
48768
48769
48770
48771
48772
48773
48774
48775
48776
48777
48778
48779
48780
48781
48782
48783
48784
48785
48786
48787
48788
48789
48790
48791
48792
48793
48794
48795
48796
48797
48798
48799
48800
48801
48802
48803
48804
48805
48806
48807
48808
48809
48810
48811
48812
48813
48814
48815
48816
48817
48818
48819
48820
48821
48822
48823
48824
48825
48826
48827
48828
48829
48830
48831
48832
48833
48834
48835
48836
48837
48838
48839
48840
48841
48842
48843
48844
48845
48846
48847
48848
48849
48850
48851
48852
48853
48854
48855
48856
48857
48858
48859
48860
48861
48862
48863
48864
48865
48866
48867
48868
48869
48870
48871
48872
48873
48874
48875
48876
48877
48878
48879
48880
48881
48882
48883
48884
48885
48886
48887
48888
48889
48890
48891
48892
48893
48894
48895
48896
48897
48898
48899
48900
48901
48902
48903
48904
48905
48906
48907
48908
48909
48910
48911
48912
48913
48914
48915
48916
48917
48918
48919
48920
48921
48922
48923
48924
48925
48926
48927
48928
48929
48930
48931
48932
48933
48934
48935
48936
48937
48938
48939
48940
48941
48942
48943
48944
48945
48946
48947
48948
48949
48950
48951
48952
48953
48954
48955
48956
48957
48958
48959
48960
48961
48962
48963
48964
48965
48966
48967
48968
48969
48970
48971
48972
48973
48974
48975
48976
48977
48978
48979
48980
48981
48982
48983
48984
48985
48986
48987
48988
48989
48990
48991
48992
48993
48994
48995
48996
48997
48998
48999
49000
49001
49002
49003
49004
49005
49006
49007
49008
49009
49010
49011
49012
49013
49014
49015
49016
49017
49018
49019
49020
49021
49022
49023
49024
49025
49026
49027
49028
49029
49030
49031
49032
49033
49034
49035
49036
49037
49038
49039
49040
49041
49042
49043
49044
49045
49046
49047
49048
49049
49050
49051
49052
49053
49054
49055
49056
49057
49058
49059
49060
49061
49062
49063
49064
49065
49066
49067
49068
49069
49070
49071
49072
49073
49074
49075
49076
49077
49078
49079
49080
49081
49082
49083
49084
49085
49086
49087
49088
49089
49090
49091
49092
49093
49094
49095
49096
49097
49098
49099
49100
49101
49102
49103
49104
49105
49106
49107
49108
49109
49110
49111
49112
49113
49114
49115
49116
49117
49118
49119
49120
49121
49122
49123
49124
49125
49126
49127
49128
49129
49130
49131
49132
49133
49134
49135
49136
49137
49138
49139
49140
49141
49142
49143
49144
49145
49146
49147
49148
49149
49150
49151
49152
49153
49154
49155
49156
49157
49158
49159
49160
49161
49162
49163
49164
49165
49166
49167
49168
49169
49170
49171
49172
49173
49174
49175
49176
49177
49178
49179
49180
49181
49182
49183
49184
49185
49186
49187
49188
49189
49190
49191
49192
49193
49194
49195
49196
49197
49198
49199
49200
49201
49202
49203
49204
49205
49206
49207
49208
49209
49210
49211
49212
49213
49214
49215
49216
49217
49218
49219
49220
49221
49222
49223
49224
49225
49226
49227
49228
49229
49230
49231
49232
49233
49234
49235
49236
49237
49238
49239
49240
49241
49242
49243
49244
49245
49246
49247
49248
49249
49250
49251
49252
49253
49254
49255
49256
49257
49258
49259
49260
49261
49262
49263
49264
49265
49266
49267
49268
49269
49270
49271
49272
49273
49274
49275
49276
49277
49278
49279
49280
49281
49282
49283
49284
49285
49286
49287
49288
49289
49290
49291
49292
49293
49294
49295
49296
49297
49298
49299
49300
49301
49302
49303
49304
49305
49306
49307
49308
49309
49310
49311
49312
49313
49314
49315
49316
49317
49318
49319
49320
49321
49322
49323
49324
49325
49326
49327
49328
49329
49330
49331
49332
49333
49334
49335
49336
49337
49338
49339
49340
49341
49342
49343
49344
49345
49346
49347
49348
49349
49350
49351
49352
49353
49354
49355
49356
49357
49358
49359
49360
49361
49362
49363
49364
49365
49366
49367
49368
49369
49370
49371
49372
49373
49374
49375
49376
49377
49378
49379
49380
49381
49382
49383
49384
49385
49386
49387
49388
49389
49390
49391
49392
49393
49394
49395
49396
49397
49398
49399
49400
49401
49402
49403
49404
49405
49406
49407
49408
49409
49410
49411
49412
49413
49414
49415
49416
49417
49418
49419
49420
49421
49422
49423
49424
49425
49426
49427
49428
49429
49430
49431
49432
49433
49434
49435
49436
49437
49438
49439
49440
49441
49442
49443
49444
49445
49446
49447
49448
49449
49450
49451
49452
49453
49454
49455
49456
49457
49458
49459
49460
49461
49462
49463
49464
49465
49466
49467
49468
49469
49470
49471
49472
49473
49474
49475
49476
49477
49478
49479
49480
49481
49482
49483
49484
49485
49486
49487
49488
49489
49490
49491
49492
49493
49494
49495
49496
49497
49498
49499
49500
49501
49502
49503
49504
49505
49506
49507
49508
49509
49510
49511
49512
49513
49514
49515
49516
49517
49518
49519
49520
49521
49522
49523
49524
49525
49526
49527
49528
49529
49530
49531
49532
49533
49534
49535
49536
49537
49538
49539
49540
49541
49542
49543
49544
49545
49546
49547
49548
49549
49550
49551
49552
49553
49554
49555
49556
49557
49558
49559
49560
49561
49562
49563
49564
49565
49566
49567
49568
49569
49570
49571
49572
49573
49574
49575
49576
49577
49578
49579
49580
49581
49582
49583
49584
49585
49586
49587
49588
49589
49590
49591
49592
49593
49594
49595
49596
49597
49598
49599
49600
49601
49602
49603
49604
49605
49606
49607
49608
49609
49610
49611
49612
49613
49614
49615
49616
49617
49618
49619
49620
49621
49622
49623
49624
49625
49626
49627
49628
49629
49630
49631
49632
49633
49634
49635
49636
49637
49638
49639
49640
49641
49642
49643
49644
49645
49646
49647
49648
49649
49650
49651
49652
49653
49654
49655
49656
49657
49658
49659
49660
49661
49662
49663
49664
49665
49666
49667
49668
49669
49670
49671
49672
49673
49674
49675
49676
49677
49678
49679
49680
49681
49682
49683
49684
49685
49686
49687
49688
49689
49690
49691
49692
49693
49694
49695
49696
49697
49698
49699
49700
49701
49702
49703
49704
49705
49706
49707
49708
49709
49710
49711
49712
49713
49714
49715
49716
49717
49718
49719
49720
49721
49722
49723
49724
49725
49726
49727
49728
49729
49730
49731
49732
49733
49734
49735
49736
49737
49738
49739
49740
49741
49742
49743
49744
49745
49746
49747
49748
49749
49750
49751
49752
49753
49754
49755
49756
49757
49758
49759
49760
49761
49762
49763
49764
49765
49766
49767
49768
49769
49770
49771
49772
49773
49774
49775
49776
49777
49778
49779
49780
49781
49782
49783
49784
49785
49786
49787
49788
49789
49790
49791
49792
49793
49794
49795
49796
49797
49798
49799
49800
49801
49802
49803
49804
49805
49806
49807
49808
49809
49810
49811
49812
49813
49814
49815
49816
49817
49818
49819
49820
49821
49822
49823
49824
49825
49826
49827
49828
49829
49830
49831
49832
49833
49834
49835
49836
49837
49838
49839
49840
49841
49842
49843
49844
49845
49846
49847
49848
49849
49850
49851
49852
49853
49854
49855
49856
49857
49858
49859
49860
49861
49862
49863
49864
49865
49866
49867
49868
49869
49870
49871
49872
49873
49874
49875
49876
49877
49878
49879
49880
49881
49882
49883
49884
49885
49886
49887
49888
49889
49890
49891
49892
49893
49894
49895
49896
49897
49898
49899
49900
49901
49902
49903
49904
49905
49906
49907
49908
49909
49910
49911
49912
49913
49914
49915
49916
49917
49918
49919
49920
49921
49922
49923
49924
49925
49926
49927
49928
49929
49930
49931
49932
49933
49934
49935
49936
49937
49938
49939
49940
49941
49942
49943
49944
49945
49946
49947
49948
49949
49950
49951
49952
49953
49954
49955
49956
49957
49958
49959
49960
49961
49962
49963
49964
49965
49966
49967
49968
49969
49970
49971
49972
49973
49974
49975
49976
49977
49978
49979
49980
49981
49982
49983
49984
49985
49986
49987
49988
49989
49990
49991
49992
49993
49994
49995
49996
49997
49998
49999
50000
50001
50002
50003
50004
50005
50006
50007
50008
50009
50010
50011
50012
50013
50014
50015
50016
50017
50018
50019
50020
50021
50022
50023
50024
50025
50026
50027
50028
50029
50030
50031
50032
50033
50034
50035
50036
50037
50038
50039
50040
50041
50042
50043
50044
50045
50046
50047
50048
50049
50050
50051
50052
50053
50054
50055
50056
50057
50058
50059
50060
50061
50062
50063
50064
50065
50066
50067
50068
50069
50070
50071
50072
50073
50074
50075
50076
50077
50078
50079
50080
50081
50082
50083
50084
50085
50086
50087
50088
50089
50090
50091
50092
50093
50094
50095
50096
50097
50098
50099
50100
50101
50102
50103
50104
50105
50106
50107
50108
50109
50110
50111
50112
50113
50114
50115
50116
50117
50118
50119
50120
50121
50122
50123
50124
50125
50126
50127
50128
50129
50130
50131
50132
50133
50134
50135
50136
50137
50138
50139
50140
50141
50142
50143
50144
50145
50146
50147
50148
50149
50150
50151
50152
50153
50154
50155
50156
50157
50158
50159
50160
50161
50162
50163
50164
50165
50166
50167
50168
50169
50170
50171
50172
50173
50174
50175
50176
50177
50178
50179
50180
50181
50182
50183
50184
50185
50186
50187
50188
50189
50190
50191
50192
50193
50194
50195
50196
50197
50198
50199
50200
50201
50202
50203
50204
50205
50206
50207
50208
50209
50210
50211
50212
50213
50214
50215
50216
50217
50218
50219
50220
50221
50222
50223
50224
50225
50226
50227
50228
50229
50230
50231
50232
50233
50234
50235
50236
50237
50238
50239
50240
50241
50242
50243
50244
50245
50246
50247
50248
50249
50250
50251
50252
50253
50254
50255
50256
50257
50258
50259
50260
50261
50262
50263
50264
50265
50266
50267
50268
50269
50270
50271
50272
50273
50274
50275
50276
50277
50278
50279
50280
50281
50282
50283
50284
50285
50286
50287
50288
50289
50290
50291
50292
50293
50294
50295
50296
50297
50298
50299
50300
50301
50302
50303
50304
50305
50306
50307
50308
50309
50310
50311
50312
50313
50314
50315
50316
50317
50318
50319
50320
50321
50322
50323
50324
50325
50326
50327
50328
50329
50330
50331
50332
50333
50334
50335
50336
50337
50338
50339
50340
50341
50342
50343
50344
50345
50346
50347
50348
50349
50350
50351
50352
50353
50354
50355
50356
50357
50358
50359
50360
50361
50362
50363
50364
50365
50366
50367
50368
50369
50370
50371
50372
50373
50374
50375
50376
50377
50378
50379
50380
50381
50382
50383
50384
50385
50386
50387
50388
50389
50390
50391
50392
50393
50394
50395
50396
50397
50398
50399
50400
50401
50402
50403
50404
50405
50406
50407
50408
50409
50410
50411
50412
50413
50414
50415
50416
50417
50418
50419
50420
50421
50422
50423
50424
50425
50426
50427
50428
50429
50430
50431
50432
50433
50434
50435
50436
50437
50438
50439
50440
50441
50442
50443
50444
50445
50446
50447
50448
50449
50450
50451
50452
50453
50454
50455
50456
50457
50458
50459
50460
50461
50462
50463
50464
50465
50466
50467
50468
50469
50470
50471
50472
50473
50474
50475
50476
50477
50478
50479
50480
50481
50482
50483
50484
50485
50486
50487
50488
50489
50490
50491
50492
50493
50494
50495
50496
50497
50498
50499
50500
50501
50502
50503
50504
50505
50506
50507
50508
50509
50510
50511
50512
50513
50514
50515
50516
50517
50518
50519
50520
50521
50522
50523
50524
50525
50526
50527
50528
50529
50530
50531
50532
50533
50534
50535
50536
50537
50538
50539
50540
50541
50542
50543
50544
50545
50546
50547
50548
50549
50550
50551
50552
50553
50554
50555
50556
50557
50558
50559
50560
50561
50562
50563
50564
50565
50566
50567
50568
50569
50570
50571
50572
50573
50574
50575
50576
50577
50578
50579
50580
50581
50582
50583
50584
50585
50586
50587
50588
50589
50590
50591
50592
50593
50594
50595
50596
50597
50598
50599
50600
50601
50602
50603
50604
50605
50606
50607
50608
50609
50610
50611
50612
50613
50614
50615
50616
50617
50618
50619
50620
50621
50622
50623
50624
50625
50626
50627
50628
50629
50630
50631
50632
50633
50634
50635
50636
50637
50638
50639
50640
50641
50642
50643
50644
50645
50646
50647
50648
50649
50650
50651
50652
50653
50654
50655
50656
50657
50658
50659
50660
50661
50662
50663
50664
50665
50666
50667
50668
50669
50670
50671
50672
50673
50674
50675
50676
50677
50678
50679
50680
50681
50682
50683
50684
50685
50686
50687
50688
50689
50690
50691
50692
50693
50694
50695
50696
50697
50698
50699
50700
50701
50702
50703
50704
50705
50706
50707
50708
50709
50710
50711
50712
50713
50714
50715
50716
50717
50718
50719
50720
50721
50722
50723
50724
50725
50726
50727
50728
50729
50730
50731
50732
50733
50734
50735
50736
50737
50738
50739
50740
50741
50742
50743
50744
50745
50746
50747
50748
50749
50750
50751
50752
50753
50754
50755
50756
50757
50758
50759
50760
50761
50762
50763
50764
50765
50766
50767
50768
50769
50770
50771
50772
50773
50774
50775
50776
50777
50778
50779
50780
50781
50782
50783
50784
50785
50786
50787
50788
50789
50790
50791
50792
50793
50794
50795
50796
50797
50798
50799
50800
50801
50802
50803
50804
50805
50806
50807
50808
50809
50810
50811
50812
50813
50814
50815
50816
50817
50818
50819
50820
50821
50822
50823
50824
50825
50826
50827
50828
50829
50830
50831
50832
50833
50834
50835
50836
50837
50838
50839
50840
50841
50842
50843
50844
50845
50846
50847
50848
50849
50850
50851
50852
50853
50854
50855
50856
50857
50858
50859
50860
50861
50862
50863
50864
50865
50866
50867
50868
50869
50870
50871
50872
50873
50874
50875
50876
50877
50878
50879
50880
50881
50882
50883
50884
50885
50886
50887
50888
50889
50890
50891
50892
50893
50894
50895
50896
50897
50898
50899
50900
50901
50902
50903
50904
50905
50906
50907
50908
50909
50910
50911
50912
50913
50914
50915
50916
50917
50918
50919
50920
50921
50922
50923
50924
50925
50926
50927
50928
50929
50930
50931
50932
50933
50934
50935
50936
50937
50938
50939
50940
50941
50942
50943
50944
50945
50946
50947
50948
50949
50950
50951
50952
50953
50954
50955
50956
50957
50958
50959
50960
50961
50962
50963
50964
50965
50966
50967
50968
50969
50970
50971
50972
50973
50974
50975
50976
50977
50978
50979
50980
50981
50982
50983
50984
50985
50986
50987
50988
50989
50990
50991
50992
50993
50994
50995
50996
50997
50998
50999
51000
51001
51002
51003
51004
51005
51006
51007
51008
51009
51010
51011
51012
51013
51014
51015
51016
51017
51018
51019
51020
51021
51022
51023
51024
51025
51026
51027
51028
51029
51030
51031
51032
51033
51034
51035
51036
51037
51038
51039
51040
51041
51042
51043
51044
51045
51046
51047
51048
51049
51050
51051
51052
51053
51054
51055
51056
51057
51058
51059
51060
51061
51062
51063
51064
51065
51066
51067
51068
51069
51070
51071
51072
51073
51074
51075
51076
51077
51078
51079
51080
51081
51082
51083
51084
51085
51086
51087
51088
51089
51090
51091
51092
51093
51094
51095
51096
51097
51098
51099
51100
51101
51102
51103
51104
51105
51106
51107
51108
51109
51110
51111
51112
51113
51114
51115
51116
51117
51118
51119
51120
51121
51122
51123
51124
51125
51126
51127
51128
51129
51130
51131
51132
51133
51134
51135

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<!-- saved from url=(0059)http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html -->
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title>C++ Standard Library Closed Issues 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">D3183=10-0173</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 &lt;<a href="mailto:lwgchair@gmail.com">lwgchair@gmail.com</a>&gt;</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<h1>C++ Standard Library Closed Issues 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-defects.html">Library Defect Reports List</a></li>
    </ul>

  <p>This document contains only library issues which have been closed
  by the Library Working Group as duplicates or not defects. That is,
  issues which have a status of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a> or
  <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>. See the <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html">Library Active Issues List</a> active issues and more
  information. See the <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html">Library Defect Reports List</a> for issues considered
  defects.  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-Cura�ao 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-Cura�ao 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>Closed Issues</h2>
<hr>
<h3><a name="2"></a>2. Auto_ptr conversions effects incorrect</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> D.12.1.3 [auto.ptr.conv] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1997-12-04 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Paragraph 1 in "Effects", says "Calls
p-&gt;release()" where it clearly must be "Calls
p.release()". (As it is, it seems to require using
auto_ptr&lt;&gt;::operator-&gt; to refer to X::release, assuming that
exists.)</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Change 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] paragraph 1 Effects from 
"Calls p-&gt;release()" to "Calls p.release()".</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect: the proposed change is already found in the standard.
[Originally classified as a defect, later reclassified.]</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="4"></a>4. Basic_string size_type and difference_type should be implementation defined</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 1997-11-16 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In Morristown we changed the size_type and difference_type typedefs
for all the other containers to implementation defined with a
reference to 23.2 [container.requirements].  This should probably also have been
done for strings. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect.  [Originally classified as a defect, later
reclassified.]  basic_string, unlike the other standard library
template containers, is severely constrained by its use of
char_traits. Those types are dictated by the traits class, and are far
from implementation defined.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="6"></a>6. File position not an offset unimplementable</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Table 88, in I/O, is too strict; it's unimplementable on systems
where a file position isn't just an offset. It also never says just
what fpos&lt;&gt; is really supposed to be.  [Here's my summary, which
Jerry agrees is more or less accurate. "I think I now know what
the class really is, at this point: it's a magic cookie that
encapsulates an mbstate_t and a file position (possibly represented as
an fpos_t), it has syntactic support for pointer-like arithmetic, and
implementors are required to have real, not just syntactic, support
for arithmetic." This isn't standardese, of course.] </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect. The LWG believes that the Standard is already clear,
and that the above summary is what the Standard in effect says.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="10"></a>10. Codecvt&lt;&gt;::do unclear</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-01-14 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#19">19</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Section 22.2.1.5.2 says that codecvt&lt;&gt;::do_in and do_out
should return the value noconv if "no conversion was
needed". However, I don't see anything anywhere that defines what
it means for a conversion to be needed or not needed. I can think of
several circumstances where one might plausibly think that a
conversion is not "needed", but I don't know which one is
intended here. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="12"></a>12. Way objects hold allocators unclear</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1998-02-23 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>I couldn't find a statement in the standard saying whether the allocator object held by
a container is held as a copy of the constructor argument or whether a pointer of
reference is maintained internal. There is an according statement for compare objects and
how they are maintained by the associative containers, but I couldn't find anything
regarding allocators. </p>

<p>Did I overlook it? Is it an open issue or known defect? Or is it deliberately left
unspecified? </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect. The LWG believes that the Standard is already
clear.&nbsp; See 23.2 [container.requirements], paragraph 8.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="43"></a>43. Locale table correction</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Brendan Kehoe <b>Opened:</b> 1998-06-01 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#33">33</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="45"></a>45. Stringstreams read/write pointers initial position unclear</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8.3 [ostringstream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matthias Mueller <b>Opened:</b> 1998-05-27 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In a comp.lang.c++.moderated Matthias Mueller wrote:</p>

<p>"We are not sure how to interpret the CD2 (see 27.3 [iostream.forward], 27.8.3.1 [ostringstream.cons], 27.8.1.1 [stringbuf.cons])
with respect to the question as to what the correct initial positions
of the write and&nbsp; read pointers of a stringstream should
be."</p>

<p>"Is it the same to output two strings or to initialize the stringstream with the
first and to output the second?"</p>

<p><i>[PJ Plauger, Bjarne Stroustrup, Randy Smithey, Sean Corfield, and
Jerry Schwarz have all offered opinions; see reflector messages
lib-6518, 6519, 6520, 6521, 6523, 6524.]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes the Standard is correct as written. The behavior
of stringstreams is consistent with fstreams, and there is a
constructor which can be used to obtain the desired effect. This
behavior is known to be different from strstreams.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="58"></a>58. Extracting a char from a wide-oriented stream</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-01 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>27.6.1.2.3 has member functions for extraction of signed char and
unsigned char, both singly and as strings. However, it doesn't say
what it means to extract a <tt>char</tt> from a
<tt>basic_streambuf&lt;charT, Traits&gt;</tt>. </p>

<p>basic_streambuf, after all, has no members to extract a char, so
basic_istream must somehow convert from charT to signed char or
unsigned char. The standard doesn't say how it is to perform that
conversion. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The Standard is correct as written.  There is no such extractor and
this is the intent of the LWG.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="65"></a>65. Underspecification of strstreambuf::seekoff</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The standard says how this member function affects the current
stream position. (<tt>gptr</tt> or <tt>pptr</tt>) However, it does not
say how this member function affects the beginning and end of the
get/put area. </p>

<p>This is an issue when seekoff is used to position the get pointer
beyond the end of the current read area. (Which is legal. This is
implicit in the definition of <i>seekhigh</i> in D.7.1, paragraph 4.)
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG agrees that seekoff() is underspecified, but does not wish
to invest effort in this deprecated feature.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="67"></a>67. Setw useless 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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1998-07-09 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#25">25</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In a comp.std.c++ posting Michel Michaud wrote: What
should be output by: </p>

<pre>   string text("Hello");
   cout &lt;&lt; '[' &lt;&lt; setw(10) &lt;&lt; right &lt;&lt; text &lt;&lt; ']';
</pre>

<p>Shouldn't it be:</p>

<pre>   [     Hello]</pre>

<p>Another person replied: Actually, according to the FDIS, the width
of the field should be the minimum of width and the length of the
string, so the output shouldn't have any padding. I think that this is
a typo, however, and that what is wanted is the maximum of the
two. (As written, setw is useless for strings. If that had been the
intent, one wouldn't expect them to have mentioned using its value.)
</p>

<p>It's worth pointing out that this is a recent correction anyway;
IIRC, earlier versions of the draft forgot to mention formatting
parameters whatsoever.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="72"></a>72. Do_convert phantom member function</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-24 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#24">24</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] par 3, and in 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals] par 8, a nonexistent member function
"do_convert" is mentioned. This member was replaced with
"do_in" and "do_out", the proper referents in the
contexts above.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="73"></a>73. <tt>is_open</tt> should be const</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-08-27 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Classes <tt>basic_ifstream</tt>, <tt>basic_ofstream</tt>, and
<tt>basic_fstream</tt> all have a member function <tt>is_open</tt>. It
should be a <tt>const</tt> member function, since it does nothing but
call one of <tt>basic_filebuf</tt>'s const member functions. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect. This is a deliberate feature; const streams would be
meaningless.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="77"></a>77. Valarray operator[] const returning 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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Levente Farkas <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-09 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#389">389</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>valarray:<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <tt>T operator[] (size_t) const;</tt><br>
<br>
why not <br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <tt>const T&amp; operator[] (size_t) const;</tt><br>
<br>
as in vector ???<br>
<br>
One can't copy even from a const valarray eg:<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <tt>memcpy(ptr, &amp;v[0], v.size() * sizeof(double));<br>
</tt><br>
[I] find this bug in valarray is very difficult.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes that the interface was deliberately designed that
way. That is what valarray was designed to do; that's where the
"value array" name comes from. LWG members further comment
that "we don't want valarray to be a full STL container."
26.6.2.3 [valarray.access] specifies properties that indicate "an
absence of aliasing" for non-constant arrays; this allows
optimizations, including special hardware optimizations, that are not
otherwise possible. </p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="81"></a>81. Wrong declaration of slice operations</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.5 [template.slice.array], 26.6.7 [template.gslice.array], 26.6.8 [template.mask.array], 26.6.9 [template.indirect.array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Isn't the definition of copy constructor and assignment operators wrong?
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Instead of</p>

<pre>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; slice_array(const slice_array&amp;); 
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; slice_array&amp; operator=(const slice_array&amp;);</pre>

<p>IMHO they have to be</p>

<pre>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;slice_array(const slice_array&lt;T&gt;&amp;); 
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;slice_array&amp; operator=(const slice_array&lt;T&gt;&amp;);</pre>

<p>Same for gslice_array. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect. The Standard is correct as written. </p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="82"></a>82. Missing constant for set elements</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Paragraph 5 specifies:</p>

<blockquote><p>
For set and multiset the value type is the same as the key type. For
map and multimap it is equal to pair&lt;const Key, T&gt;.  
</p></blockquote>

<p>Strictly speaking, this is not correct because for set and multiset
the value type is the same as the <b>constant</b> key type.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect. The Standard is correct as written; it uses a
different mechanism (const &amp;) for <tt>set</tt> and
<tt>multiset</tt>. See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103">103</a> for a related
issue.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="84"></a>84. Ambiguity with string::insert()</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.5 [string.access] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1998-09-29 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>If I try</p>
<pre>    s.insert(0,1,' ');</pre>

<p>&nbsp; I get an nasty ambiguity. It might be</p>
<pre>    s.insert((size_type)0,(size_type)1,(charT)' ');</pre>

<p>which inserts 1 space character at position 0, or</p>
<pre>    s.insert((char*)0,(size_type)1,(charT)' ')</pre>

<p>which inserts 1 space character at iterator/address 0 (bingo!), or</p>
<pre>    s.insert((char*)0, (InputIterator)1, (InputIterator)' ')</pre>

<p>which normally inserts characters from iterator 1 to iterator '
'. But according to 23.1.1.9 (the "do the right thing" fix)
it is equivalent to the second. However, it is still ambiguous,
because of course I mean the first!</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Not a defect. The LWG believes this is a "genetic
misfortune" inherent in the design of string and thus not a
defect in the Standard as such .</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="85"></a>85. String char types</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21 [strings] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The standard seems not to require that charT is equivalent to
traits::char_type. So, what happens if charT is not equivalent to
traits::char_type?</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>There is already wording in 21.2 [char.traits] paragraph 3 that
requires them to be the same.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="87"></a>87. Error in description of string::compare()</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#Dup">Dup</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::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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#5">5</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The following compare() description is obviously a bug:</p>

<pre>int compare(size_type pos, size_type n1, 
            charT *s, size_type n2 = npos) const;
</pre>

<p>because without passing n2 it should compare up to the end of the
string instead of comparing npos characters (which throws an
exception) </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="88"></a>88. Inconsistency between string::insert() and string::append()</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.4 [string::insert], 21.4.6.2 [string::append] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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::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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Why does </p>
<pre>  template&lt;class InputIterator&gt; 
       basic_string&amp; append(InputIterator first, InputIterator last);</pre>

<p>return a string, while</p>
<pre>  template&lt;class InputIterator&gt; 
       void insert(iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last);</pre>

<p>returns nothing ?</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes this stylistic inconsistency is not sufficiently 
serious to constitute a defect.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="89"></a>89. Missing throw specification for string::insert() and string::replace()</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#Dup">Dup</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::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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#83">83</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>All insert() and replace() members for strings with an iterator as
first argument lack a throw specification. The throw
specification should probably be: length_error if size exceeds
maximum. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Considered a duplicate because it will be solved by the resolution
of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#83">83</a>.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="93"></a>93. Incomplete Valarray Subset Definitions</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>You can easily create subsets, but you can't easily combine them
with other subsets.  Unfortunately, you almost always needs an
explicit type conversion to valarray. This is because the standard
does not specify that valarray subsets provide the same operations as
valarrays. </p>

<p>For example, to multiply two subsets and assign the result to a third subset, you can't
write the following:</p>

<pre>va[slice(0,4,3)] = va[slice(1,4,3)] * va[slice(2,4,3)];</pre>

<p>Instead, you have to code as follows:</p>

<pre>va[slice(0,4,3)] = static_cast&lt;valarray&lt;double&gt; &gt;(va[slice(1,4,3)]) * 
                   static_cast&lt;valarray&lt;double&gt; &gt;(va[slice(2,4,3)]);</pre>

<p>This is tedious and error-prone. Even worse, it costs performance because each cast
creates a temporary objects, which could be avoided without the cast. </p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Extend all valarray subset types so that they offer all valarray operations.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect in the Standard; it is a request for an extension.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="94"></a>94. May library implementors add template parameters to Standard Library classes?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4 [conforming] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 1998-01-22 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Is it a permitted extension for library implementors to add template parameters to
standard library classes, provided that those extra parameters have defaults? For example,
instead of defining <tt>template &lt;class T, class Alloc = allocator&lt;T&gt; &gt; class
vector;</tt> defining it as <tt>template &lt;class T, class Alloc = allocator&lt;T&gt;,
int N = 1&gt; class vector;</tt> </p>

<p>The standard may well already allow this (I can't think of any way that this extension
could break a conforming program, considering that users are not permitted to
forward-declare standard library components), but it ought to be explicitly permitted or
forbidden. </p>

<p>comment from Steve Cleary via comp.std.c++:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I disagree [with the proposed resolution] for the following reason:
consider user library code with template template parameters. For
example, a user library object may be templated on the type of
underlying sequence storage to use (deque/list/vector), since these
classes all take the same number and type of template parameters; this
would allow the user to determine the performance tradeoffs of the
user library object. A similar example is a user library object
templated on the type of underlying set storage (set/multiset) or map
storage (map/multimap), which would allow users to change (within
reason) the semantic meanings of operations on that object.</p>
<p>I think that additional template parameters should be forbidden in
the Standard classes. Library writers don't lose any expressive power,
and can still offer extensions because additional template parameters
may be provided by a non-Standard implementation class:</p>
<pre> 
   template &lt;class T, class Allocator = allocator&lt;T&gt;, int N = 1&gt;
   class __vector
   { ... };
   template &lt;class T, class Allocator = allocator&lt;T&gt; &gt;
   class vector: public __vector&lt;T, Allocator&gt;
   { ... };
</pre>

</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Add a new subclause [presumably 17.4.4.9] following 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling]:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>17.4.4.9 Template Parameters</p> <p>A specialization of a
  template class described in the C++ Standard Library behaves the
  same as if the implementation declares no additional template
  parameters.</p> <p>Footnote: Additional template parameters with
  default values are thus permitted.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Add "template parameters" to the list of subclauses at
the end of 17.6.4 [conforming] paragraph 1.</p>

<p><i>[Kona: The LWG agreed the standard needs clarification. After
discussion with John Spicer, it seems added template parameters can be
detected by a program using template-template parameters. A straw vote
- "should implementors be allowed to add template
parameters?" found no consensus ; 5 - yes, 7 - no.]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
There is no ambiguity; the standard is clear as written.  Library
implementors are not permitted to add template parameters to standard
library classes.  This does not fall under the "as if" rule,
so it would be permitted only if the standard gave explicit license
for implementors to do this.  This would require a change in the 
standard.
</p>

<p>
The LWG decided against making this change, because it would break
user code involving template template parameters or specializations
of standard library class templates.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="95"></a>95. Members added by the implementation</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4.5 [member.functions] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In 17.3.4.4/2 vs 17.3.4.7/0 there is a hole; an implementation could add virtual
members a base class and break user derived classes.</p>

<p>Example: </p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>// implementation code:
struct _Base { // _Base is in the implementer namespace
        virtual void foo ();
};
class vector : _Base // deriving from a class is allowed
{ ... };

// user code:
class vector_checking : public vector 
{
        void foo (); // don't want to override _Base::foo () as the 
                     // user doesn't know about _Base::foo ()
};</pre>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Clarify the wording to make the example illegal.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect in the Standard.&nbsp; The example is already
illegal.&nbsp; See 17.6.4.5 [member.functions] paragraph 2.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="96"></a>96. Vector&lt;bool&gt; is not a container</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> is not a container as its reference and
pointer types are not references and pointers. </p>

<p>Also it forces everyone to have a space optimization instead of a
speed one.</p>

<p><b>See also:</b> 99-0008 == N1185 Vector&lt;bool&gt; is
Nonconforming, Forces Optimization Choice.</p>

<p><i>[In Santa Cruz the LWG felt that this was Not A Defect.]</i></p>


<p><i>[In Dublin many present felt that failure to meet Container
requirements was a defect. There was disagreement as to whether
or not the optimization requirements constituted a defect.]</i></p>


<p><i>[The LWG looked at the following resolutions in some detail:
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * Not A Defect.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * Add a note explaining that vector&lt;bool&gt; does not meet
Container requirements.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * Remove vector&lt;bool&gt;.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * Add a new category of container requirements which
vector&lt;bool&gt; would meet.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; * Rename vector&lt;bool&gt;.<br>
<br>
No alternative had strong, wide-spread, support and every alternative
had at least one "over my dead body" response.<br>
<br>
There was also mention of a transition scheme something like (1) add
vector_bool and deprecate vector&lt;bool&gt; in the next standard. (2)
Remove vector&lt;bool&gt; in the following standard.]</i></p>


<p><i>[Modifying container requirements to permit returning proxies
(thus allowing container requirements conforming vector&lt;bool&gt;)
was also discussed.]</i></p>


<p><i>[It was also noted that there is a partial but ugly workaround in
that vector&lt;bool&gt; may be further specialized with a customer
allocator.]</i></p>


<p><i>[Kona: Herb Sutter presented his paper J16/99-0035==WG21/N1211,
vector&lt;bool&gt;: More Problems, Better Solutions. Much discussion
of a two step approach: a) deprecate, b) provide replacement under a
new name.  LWG straw vote on that: 1-favor, 11-could live with, 2-over
my dead body.  This resolution was mentioned in the LWG report to the
full committee, where several additional committee members indicated
over-my-dead-body positions.]</i></p>


<p>Discussed at Lillehammer.  General agreement that we should
  deprecate vector&lt;bool&gt; and introduce this functionality under
  a different name, e.g. bit_vector.  This might make it possible to
  remove the vector&lt;bool&gt; specialization in the standard that comes
  after C++0x. There was also a suggestion that
  in C++0x we could additional say that it's implementation defined
  whether vector&lt;bool&gt; refers to the specialization or to the
  primary template, but there wasn't general agreement that this was a
  good idea.</p>

<p>We need a paper for the new bit_vector class.</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
The LWG feels we need something closer to SGI's <tt>bitvector</tt> to ease migration
from <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt>.  Although some of the funcitonality from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2050.pdf">N2050</a>
could well be used in such a template.  The concern is easing the API migration for those
users who want to continue using a bit-packed container.  Alan and Beman to work.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
<tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> is now a conforming container under the revised terms of C++0x,
which supports containers of proxies.
</p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>
<p>
Two issues remain:
</p>
<p>
i/ premature optimization in the specification.
There is still some sentiment that deprecation is the correct way to go,
although it is still not clear what it would mean to deprecate a single
specialization of a template.
</p>
<p>
Recommend: Create a new issue for the discussion, leave as Open.
</p>
<p>
ii/ Request for a new bitvector class to guarantee the optimization, perhaps
with a better tuned interface.
</p>
<p>
This is a clear extension request that may be handled via a future TR.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We note that most of this issue has become moot over time,
and agree with Alisdair's recommendations.
Move to NAD Future for reconsideration of part (ii).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-29 Alisdair reopens:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This infamous issue was closed as NAD Future when concepts introduced
support for proxy iterators, so the only remaining requirement was to
provide a better type to support bitsets of dynamic length.  I fear we
must re-open this issue until the post-concept form of iterators is
available, and hopefully will support the necessary proxy functionality
to allow us to close this issue as NAD.
</p>

<p>
I recommend we spawn a separate issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1184">1184</a>) requesting a dynamic length bitset
and pre-emptively file it as NAD Future.  It is difficult to resolve #96
when it effectively contains two separate sub-issues.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD, and give rationale.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
We now have:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2050.pdf">N2050</a>
and
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2160.html">N2160</a>.
</p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
We want to support proxy iterators but that is going to be separate
work. Don't want to see this issue come back in these kinds of terms.
We're interested in a separate container, and proxy iterators, but both
of those are separate issues.
</p>
<p>
We've looked at a lot of ways to fix this that would be close to this,
but those things would break existing code. Attempts to fix this
directly have not been tractable, and removing it has not been
tractable. Therefore we are closing.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="97"></a>97. Insert inconsistent 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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><tt>insert(iterator, const value_type&amp;)</tt> is defined both on
sequences and on set, with unrelated semantics: insert here (in
sequences), and insert with hint (in associative containers). They
should have different names (B.S. says: do not abuse overloading).</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect in the Standard. It is a genetic misfortune of
the design, for better or for worse.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="99"></a>99. Reverse_iterator comparisons completely wrong</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.3.13 [reverse.iter.op==] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The &lt;, &gt;, &lt;=, &gt;= comparison operator are wrong: they
return the opposite of what they should.</p>

<p>Note: same problem in CD2, these were not even defined in CD1.  SGI
STL code is correct; this problem is known since the Morristown
meeting but there it was too late</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect in the Standard. A careful reading shows the Standard is correct
as written. A review of several implementations show that they implement
exactly what the Standard says.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="100"></a>100. Insert iterators/ostream_iterators overconstrained</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2 [insert.iterators], 24.6.4 [ostreambuf.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#insert.iterators">issues</a> in [insert.iterators].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Overspecified For an insert iterator it, the expression *it is
required to return a reference to it. This is a simple possible
implementation, but as the SGI STL documentation says, not the only
one, and the user should not assume that this is the case.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes this causes no harm and is not a defect in the
standard. The only example anyone could come up with caused some
incorrect code to work, rather than the other way around.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="101"></a>101. No way to free storage for vector and deque</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.4.1 [vector], 23.3.1 [array] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Reserve can not free storage, unlike string::reserve</p>

<p><i>[
2010-02-13 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This issue has been revisited and addressed (<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#850">850</a>). This issues should be reclassified to NAD Editorial to reflect
this action.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect in the Standard. The LWG has considered this
issue in the past and sees no need to change the Standard. Deque has
no reserve() member function. For vector, shrink-to-fit can be
expressed in a single line of code (where <tt>v</tt> is
<tt>vector&lt;T&gt;</tt>):
</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><tt>vector&lt;T&gt;(v).swap(v);&nbsp; // shrink-to-fit v</tt></p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="102"></a>102. Bug in insert range 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#Dup">Dup</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#264">264</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Table 69 of Containers say that a.insert(i,j) is linear if [i, j) is ordered. It seems
impossible to implement, as it means that if [i, j) = [x], insert in an associative
container is O(1)!</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>N+log (size()) if [i,j) is sorted according to value_comp()</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Subsumed by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#264">264</a>.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="104"></a>104. Description of basic_string::operator[] is unclear</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>It is not clear that undefined behavior applies when pos == size ()
for the non const version.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Rewrite as: Otherwise, if pos &gt; size () or pos == size () and
the non-const version is used, then the behavior is undefined.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The Standard is correct. The proposed resolution already appears in
the Standard.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="105"></a>105. fstream ctors argument types desired</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9 [file.streams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#454">454</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>


<p>fstream ctors take a const char* instead of string.<br>
fstream ctors can't take wchar_t</p>

<p>An extension to add a const wchar_t* to fstream would make the
implementation non conforming.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect in the Standard. It might be an
interesting extension for the next Standard. </p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="107"></a>107. Valarray constructor is strange</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The order of the arguments is (elem, size) instead of the normal
(size, elem) in the rest of the library. Since elem often has an
integral or floating point type, both types are convertible to each
other and reversing them leads to a well formed program.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Inverting the arguments could silently break programs. Introduce
the two signatures (const T&amp;, size_t) and (size_t, const T&amp;),
but make the one we do not want private so errors result in a
diagnosed access violation. This technique can also be applied to STL
containers.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes that while the order of arguments is unfortunate,
it does not constitute a defect in the standard. The LWG believes that
the proposed solution will not work for valarray&lt;size_t&gt; and
perhaps other cases.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="111"></a>111. istreambuf_iterator::equal overspecified, inefficient</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#NAD">NAD</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::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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The member istreambuf_iterator&lt;&gt;::equal is specified to be
unnecessarily inefficient. While this does not affect the efficiency
of conforming implementations of iostreams, because they can
"reach into" the iterators and bypass this function, it does
affect users who use istreambuf_iterators. </p>

<p>The inefficiency results from a too-scrupulous definition, which
requires a "true" result if neither iterator is at eof. In
practice these iterators can only usefully be compared with the
"eof" value, so the extra test implied provides no benefit,
but slows down users' code. </p>

<p>The solution is to weaken the requirement on the function to return
true only if both iterators are at eof. </p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Reopened by Alisdair.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Recommend NAD. The proposed wording would violate the axioms of
concept requirement <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> axioms as part of concept <tt>InputIterator</tt>
and more specifically it would violate the explicit wording of
24.2.3 [input.iterators]/7:
</p>

<blockquote>
If two iterators <tt>a</tt> and <tt>b</tt> of the same type are equal, then either <tt>a</tt>
and <tt>b</tt> are both
dereferenceable or else neither is dereferenceable.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree NAD.
</blockquote>

</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Replace 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal],
paragraph 1, </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>-1- Returns: true if and only if both iterators are at end-of-stream, or neither is at
  end-of-stream, regardless of what streambuf object they use. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>with</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>-1- Returns: true if and only if both iterators are at
  end-of-stream, regardless of what streambuf object they use. </p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>It is not clear that this is a genuine defect.  Additionally, the
LWG was reluctant to make a change that would result in 
operator== not being a equivalence relation.  One consequence of
this change is that an algorithm that's passed the range [i, i)
would no longer treat it as an empty range.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="113"></a>113. Missing/extra iostream sync semantics</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.1 [istream], 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1998-10-13 <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">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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In 27.6.1.1, class basic_istream has a member function sync, described in 27.6.1.3,
paragraph 36. </p>

<p>Following the chain of definitions, I find that the various sync functions have defined
semantics for output streams, but no semantics for input streams. On the other hand,
basic_ostream has no sync function. </p>

<p>The sync function should at minimum be added to basic_ostream, for internal
consistency. </p>

<p>A larger question is whether sync should have assigned semantics for input streams. </p>

<p>Classic iostreams said streambuf::sync flushes pending output and attempts to return
unread input characters to the source. It is a protected member function. The filebuf
version (which is public) has that behavior (it backs up the read pointer). Class
strstreambuf does not override streambuf::sync, and so sync can't be called on a
strstream. </p>

<p>If we can add corresponding semantics to the various sync functions, we should. If not,
we should remove sync from basic_istream.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>A sync function is not needed in basic_ostream because the flush function provides the
desired functionality.</p>

<p>As for the other points, the LWG finds the standard correct as written.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="116"></a>116. bitset cannot be constructed with a const char*</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1998-11-06 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#778">778</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>



<p>The following code does not compile with the EDG compiler:</p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>#include &lt;bitset&gt;
using namespace std;
bitset&lt;32&gt; b("111111111");</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>If you cast the ctor argument to a string, i.e.:</p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>bitset&lt;32&gt; b(string("111111111"));</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>then it will compile. The reason is that bitset has the following templatized
constructor:</p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>template &lt;class charT, class traits, class Allocator&gt;
explicit bitset (const basic_string&lt;charT, traits, Allocator&gt;&amp; str, ...);</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>According to the compiler vendor, Steve Adamcyk at EDG, the user
cannot pass this template constructor a <tt>const char*</tt> and
expect a conversion to <tt>basic_string</tt>.  The reason is
"When you have a template constructor, it can get used in
contexts where type deduction can be done. Type deduction basically
comes up with exact matches, not ones involving conversions."
</p>

<p>I don't think the intention when this constructor became
templatized was for construction from a <tt>const char*</tt> to no
longer work.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Add to 20.5 [template.bitset] a bitset constructor declaration</p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>explicit bitset(const char*);</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>and in Section 20.5.1 [bitset.cons] add:</p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>explicit bitset(const char* str);</pre>
  <p>Effects: <br>
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Calls <tt>bitset((string) str, 0, string::npos);</tt></p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Although the problem is real, the standard is designed that way so
it is not a defect.  Education is the immediate workaround. A future
standard may wish to consider the Proposed Resolution as an
extension.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="121"></a>121. Detailed definition for ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt; specialization</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Section 22.1.1.1.1 has the following listed in Table 51: ctype&lt;char&gt; ,
ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt;. </p>

<p>Also Section 22.4.1.1 [locale.ctype] says: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The instantiations required in Table 51 (22.1.1.1.1) namely ctype&lt;char&gt; and
  ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt; , implement character classing appropriate to the implementation's
  native character set. </p>
</blockquote>

<p>However, Section 22.4.1.3 [facet.ctype.special]
only has a detailed description of the ctype&lt;char&gt; specialization, not the
ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt; specialization. </p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Add the ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt; detailed class description to Section 
22.4.1.3 [facet.ctype.special]. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Specialization for wchar_t is not needed since the default is acceptable.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="128"></a>128. Need open_mode() function for file stream, string streams, file buffers, and string&nbsp; buffers</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.8 [string.streams], 27.9 [file.streams] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The following question came from Thorsten Herlemann:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>You can set a mode when constructing or opening a file-stream or
  filebuf, e.g.  ios::in, ios::out, ios::binary, ... But how can I get
  that mode later on, e.g. in my own operator &lt;&lt; or operator
  &gt;&gt; or when I want to check whether a file-stream or
  file-buffer object passed as parameter is opened for input or output
  or binary? Is there no possibility? Is this a design-error in the
  standard C++ library? </p>
</blockquote>

<p>It is indeed impossible to find out what a stream's or stream
buffer's open mode is, and without that knowledge you don't know
how certain operations behave. Just think of the append mode. </p>

<p>Both streams and stream buffers should have a <tt>mode()</tt> function that returns the
current open mode setting. </p>

<p><i>[
post Bellevue:  Alisdair requested to re-Open.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Neither Howard nor Bill has received a customer request for this.
</p>
<p>
No consensus for change. The programmer can save this information to the side.
</p>
<p>
Moved to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>For stream buffers, add a function to the base class as a non-virtual function
qualified as const to 27.6.2 [streambuf]:</p>

<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<tt>openmode mode() const</tt>;</p>

<p><b>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Returns</b> the current open mode.</p>

<p>With streams, I'm not sure what to suggest. In principle, the mode
could already be returned by <tt>ios_base</tt>, but the mode is only
initialized for file and string stream objects, unless I'm overlooking
anything. For this reason it should be added to the most derived
stream classes. Alternatively, it could be added to <tt>basic_ios</tt>
and would be default initialized in <tt>basic_ios&lt;&gt;::init()</tt>.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This might be an interesting extension for some future, but it is
not a defect in the current standard. The Proposed Resolution is
retained for future reference.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="131"></a>131. list::splice throws nothing</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>What happens if a splice operation causes the size() of a list to grow 
beyond max_size()?</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Size() cannot grow beyond max_size().&nbsp; </p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="135"></a>135. basic_iostream doubly initialized</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.5.1 [iostream.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>-1- Effects Constructs an object of class basic_iostream, assigning
initial values to the base classes by calling
basic_istream&lt;charT,traits&gt;(sb) (lib.istream) and
basic_ostream&lt;charT,traits&gt;(sb) (lib.ostream)</p>

<p>The called for basic_istream and basic_ostream constructors call
init(sb). This means that the basic_iostream's virtual base class is
initialized twice.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Change 27.6.1.5.1, paragraph 1 to:</p>

<p>-1- Effects Constructs an object of class basic_iostream, assigning
initial values to the base classes by calling
basic_istream&lt;charT,traits&gt;(sb) (lib.istream).</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG agreed that the <tt> init()</tt> function is called
twice, but said that this is harmless and so not a defect in the
standard.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="138"></a>138. Class ctype_byname&lt;char&gt; redundant and misleading</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-03-18 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Section 22.4.1.4 [locale.codecvt] specifies that
ctype_byname&lt;char&gt; must be a specialization of the ctype_byname
template.</p>

<p>It is common practice in the standard that specializations of class templates are only
mentioned where the interface of the specialization deviates from the interface of the
template that it is a specialization of. Otherwise, the fact whether or not a required
instantiation is an actual instantiation or a specialization is left open as an
implementation detail. </p>

<p>Clause 22.2.1.4 deviates from that practice and for that reason is misleading. The
fact, that ctype_byname&lt;char&gt; is specified as a specialization suggests that there
must be something "special" about it, but it has the exact same interface as the
ctype_byname template. Clause 22.2.1.4 does not have any explanatory value, is at best
redundant, at worst misleading - unless I am missing anything. </p>

<p>Naturally, an implementation will most likely implement ctype_byname&lt;char&gt; as a
specialization, because the base class ctype&lt;char&gt; is a specialization with an
interface different from the ctype template, but that's an implementation detail and need
not be mentioned in the standard. </p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Reopened by Alisdair.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p> The standard as written is mildly misleading, but the correct fix
is to deal with the underlying problem in the ctype_byname base class,
not in the specialization. See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#228">228</a>.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="140"></a>140. map&lt;Key, T&gt;::value_type does not satisfy the assignable requirement</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Mark Mitchell <b>Opened:</b> 1999-04-14 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<blockquote>
  <p>23.2 [container.requirements]<br>
  <br>
  expression&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; return type
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; pre/post-condition<br>
  -------------&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ----------- &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
  -------------------<br>
  X::value_type&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; T
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
  T is assignable<br>
  <br>
  23.6.1 [map]<br>
  <br>
  A map satisfies all the requirements of a container.<br>
  <br>
  For a map&lt;Key, T&gt; ... the value_type is pair&lt;const Key, T&gt;.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>There's a contradiction here. In particular, `pair&lt;const Key,
T&gt;' is not assignable; the `const Key' cannot be assigned
to. So,&nbsp; map&lt;Key, T&gt;::value_type does not satisfy the
assignable requirement imposed by a container.</p>

<p><i>[See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#103">103</a> for the slightly related issue of
modification of set keys.]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes that the standard is inconsistent, but that this
is a design problem rather than a strict defect. May wish to
reconsider for the next standard.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="143"></a>143. C .h header wording unclear</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> D.7 [depr.c.headers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Christophe de Dinechin <b>Opened:</b> 1999-05-04 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>[depr.c.headers] paragraph 2 reads:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Each C header, whose name has the form name.h, behaves as if each
name placed in the Standard library namespace by the corresponding
cname header is also placed within the namespace scope of the
namespace std and is followed by an explicit using-declaration
(_namespace.udecl_)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think it should mention the global name space somewhere...&nbsp;
Currently, it indicates that name placed in std is also placed in
std...</p>

<p>I don't know what is the correct wording. For instance, if struct
tm is defined in time.h, ctime declares std::tm. However, the current
wording seems ambiguous regarding which of the following would occur
for use of both ctime and time.h:</p>

<blockquote>
  <pre>// version 1:
namespace std {
        struct tm { ... };
}
using std::tm;

// version 2:
struct tm { ... };
namespace std {
        using ::tm;
}

// version 3:
struct tm { ... };
namespace std {
        struct tm { ... };
}</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>I think version 1 is intended.</p>

<p><i>[Kona: The LWG agreed that the wording is not clear. It also
agreed that version 1 is intended, version 2 is not equivalent to
version 1, and version 3 is clearly not intended. The example below
was constructed by Nathan Myers to illustrate why version 2 is not
equivalent to version 1.</i></p>

<p><i>Although not equivalent, the LWG is unsure if (2) is enough of
a problem to be prohibited. Points discussed in favor of allowing
(2):</i></p>

<blockquote>
  <ul>
    <li><i>It may be a convenience to implementors.</i></li>
    <li><i>The only cases that fail are structs, of which the C library
      contains only a few.</i></li>
  </ul>
</blockquote>

<p><i>]</i></p>

<p><b>Example:</b></p>

<blockquote>

<pre>#include &lt;time.h&gt;
#include &lt;utility&gt;

int main() {
    std::tm * t;
    make_pair( t, t ); // okay with version 1 due to Koenig lookup
                       // fails with version 2; make_pair not found
    return 0;
}</pre>

</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>Replace D.7 [depr.c.headers] paragraph 2 with:</p>

<blockquote>

<p> Each C header, whose name has the form name.h, behaves as if each
name placed in the Standard library namespace by the corresponding
cname header is also placed within the namespace scope of the
namespace std by name.h and is followed by an explicit
using-declaration (_namespace.udecl_) in global scope.</p>

</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p> The current wording in the standard is the result of a difficult
compromise that averted delay of the standard. Based on discussions
in Tokyo it is clear that there is no still no consensus on stricter
wording, so the issue has been closed. It is suggested that users not
write code that depends on Koenig lookup of C library functions.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="145"></a>145. adjustfield lacks default value</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>There is no initial value for the adjustfield defined, although
many people believe that the default adjustment were right. This is a
common misunderstanding. The standard only defines that, if no
adjustment is specified, all the predefined inserters must add fill
characters before the actual value, which is "as if" the
right flag were set. The flag itself need not be set.</p>

<p>When you implement a user-defined inserter you cannot rely on right
being the default setting for the adjustfield. Instead, you must be
prepared to find none of the flags set and must keep in mind that in
this case you should make your inserter behave "as if" the
right flag were set. This is surprising to many people and complicates
matters more than necessary.</p>

<p>Unless there is a good reason why the adjustfield should not be
initialized I would suggest to give it the default value that
everybody expects anyway.</p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is not a defect. It is deliberate that the default is no bits
set. Consider Arabic or Hebrew, for example. See 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] paragraph 19, Table 61 - Fill padding.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="157"></a>157. Meaningless error handling for <tt>pword()</tt> and <tt>iword()</tt></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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <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.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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#41">41</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>According to paragraphs 2 and 4 of 27.5.2.5 [ios.base.storage], the
functions <tt>iword()</tt> and <tt>pword()</tt> "set the
<tt>badbit</tt> (which might throw an exception)" on
failure. ... but what does it mean for <tt>ios_base</tt> to set the
<tt>badbit</tt>? The state facilities of the IOStream library are
defined in <tt>basic_ios</tt>, a derived class! It would be possible
to attempt a down cast but then it would be necessary to know the
character type used...</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="162"></a>162. Really "formatted input functions"?</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <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::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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#60">60</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>It appears to be somewhat nonsensical to consider the functions
defined in the 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>See also issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#166">166</a> for the same problem in formatted
output</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="163"></a>163. Return of <tt>gcount()</tt> after a call to <tt>gcount</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <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.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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#60">60</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></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>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="166"></a>166. Really "formatted output functions"?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.6.3 [ostream.inserters] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#60">60</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>From 27.7.2.6.1 [ostream.formatted.reqmts] it appears that all the functions
defined in 27.7.2.6.3 [ostream.inserters] have to construct a
<tt>sentry</tt> object. Is this really intended?</p> 

<p>This is basically the same problem as issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#162">162</a> but
for output instead of input.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="177"></a>177. Complex operators cannot be explicitly instantiated</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-02 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>A user who tries to explicitly instantiate a complex non-member operator will
get compilation errors. Below is a simplified example of the reason why. The
problem is that iterator_traits cannot be instantiated on a non-pointer type
like float, yet when the compiler is trying to decide which operator+ needs to
be instantiated it must instantiate the declaration to figure out the first
argument type of a reverse_iterator operator.</p>
<pre>namespace std {
template &lt;class Iterator&gt; 
struct iterator_traits
{
    typedef typename Iterator::value_type value_type;
};

template &lt;class T&gt; class reverse_iterator;

// reverse_iterator operator+
template &lt;class T&gt; 
reverse_iterator&lt;T&gt; operator+
(typename iterator_traits&lt;T&gt;::difference_type, const reverse_iterator&lt;T&gt;&amp;);

template &lt;class T&gt; struct complex {};

// complex operator +
template &lt;class T&gt;
complex&lt;T&gt; operator+ (const T&amp; lhs, const complex&lt;T&gt;&amp; rhs) 
{ return complex&lt;T&gt;();} 
}

// request for explicit instantiation
template std::complex&lt;float&gt; std::operator+&lt;float&gt;(const float&amp;, 
     const std::complex&lt;float&gt;&amp;);</pre>
<p>See also c++-stdlib reflector messages: lib-6814, 6815, 6816.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Implementors can make minor changes and the example will
work. Users are not affected in any case.</p> <p>According to John
Spicer, It is possible to explicitly instantiate these operators using
different syntax: change "std::operator+&lt;float&gt;" to
"std::operator+".</p>

<p>The proposed resolution of issue 120 is that users will not be able
to explicitly instantiate standard library templates. If that
resolution is accepted then library implementors will be the only ones
that will be affected by this problem, and they must use the indicated
syntax.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="178"></a>178. Should clog and cerr initially be tied to cout?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 1999-07-02 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Section 27.3.1 says "After the object cerr is initialized,
cerr.flags() &amp; unitbuf is nonzero. Its state is otherwise the same as
required for ios_base::init (lib.basic.ios.cons).  It doesn't say
anything about the the state of clog.  So this means that calling
cerr.tie() and clog.tie() should return 0 (see Table 89 for
ios_base::init effects).
</p>
<p>
Neither of the popular standard library implementations
that I tried does this, they both tie cerr and clog
to &amp;cout. I would think that would be what users expect.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The standard is clear as written.</p>
<p>27.3.1/5 says that "After the object cerr is initialized, cerr.flags()
&amp; unitbuf is nonzero. Its state is otherwise the same as required for
ios_base::init (27.4.4.1)." Table 89 in 27.4.4.1, which gives the
postconditions of basic_ios::init(), says that tie() is 0. (Other issues correct
ios_base::init to basic_ios::init().)</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="188"></a>188. valarray helpers missing augmented assignment operators</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.6 [valarray.cassign] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Gabriel Dos Reis <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-15 <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#valarray.cassign">issues</a> in [valarray.cassign].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>26.5.2.6 defines augmented assignment operators
valarray&lt;T&gt;::op=(const T&amp;), but fails to provide
corresponding versions for the helper classes. Thus making the
following illegal:</p>
<blockquote>
<pre>#include &lt;valarray&gt;

int main()
{
std::valarray&lt;double&gt; v(3.14, 1999);

v[99] *= 2.0; // Ok

std::slice s(0, 50, 2);

v[s] *= 2.0; // ERROR
}</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I can't understand the intent of that omission.  It makes the
valarray library less intuitive and less useful.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Although perhaps an unfortunate
design decision, the omission is not a defect in the current
standard.&nbsp; A future standard may wish to add the missing
operators.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="190"></a>190. min() and max() functions should be std::binary_functions</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Mark Rintoul <b>Opened:</b> 1999-08-26 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Both std::min and std::max are defined as template functions.  This
is very different than the definition of std::plus (and similar
structs) which are defined as function objects which inherit
std::binary_function.<br>
<br>
        This lack of inheritance leaves std::min and std::max somewhat useless in standard library algorithms which require
a function object that inherits std::binary_function.</p>

<p><i>[
post Bellevue:  Alisdair requested to re-Open.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
C++0x has lambdas to address this problem now.
</p>
<p>
Moved to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Although perhaps an unfortunate design decision, the omission is not a defect
in the current standard.&nbsp; A future standard may wish to consider additional
function objects.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="191"></a>191. Unclear complexity for algorithms such as binary search</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nico Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 1999-10-10 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The complexity of binary_search() is stated as "At most
log(last-first) + 2 comparisons", which seems to say that the
algorithm has logarithmic complexity. However, this algorithms is
defined for forward iterators. And for forward iterators, the need to
step element-by-element results into linear complexity. But such a
statement is missing in the standard. The same applies to
lower_bound(), upper_bound(), and equal_range().&nbsp;<br>
<br>
However, strictly speaking the standard contains no bug here. So this
might considered to be a clarification or improvement.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The complexity is expressed in terms of comparisons, and that
complexity can be met even if the number of iterators accessed is
linear. Paragraph 1 already says exactly what happens to
iterators.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="192"></a>192. a.insert(p,t) is inefficient and overconstrained</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ed Brey <b>Opened:</b> 1999-06-06 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>As defined in 23.1.2, paragraph 7 (table 69), a.insert(p,t) suffers from
several problems:</p>
<table border="1" cellpadding="5">
  <tbody><tr>
    <td><b>expression</b></td>
    <td><b>return type</b></td>
    <td><b>pre/post-condition</b></td>
    <td><b>complexity</b></td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><tt>a.insert(p,t)</tt></td>
    <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
    <td>inserts t if and only if there is no element with key equivalent to the key of 
       t in containers with unique keys; always inserts t in containers with equivalent 
       keys. always returns the iterator pointing to the element with key equivalent to 
       the key of t . iterator p is a hint pointing to where the insert should start to search.</td>
    <td>logarithmic in general, but amortized constant if t is inserted right after p .</td>
  </tr>
</tbody></table>
<p>1. For a container with unique keys, only logarithmic complexity is
guaranteed if no element is inserted, even though constant complexity is always
possible if p points to an element equivalent to t.</p>
<p>2. For a container with equivalent keys, the amortized constant complexity
guarantee is only useful if no key equivalent to t exists in the container.
Otherwise, the insertion could occur in one of multiple locations, at least one
of which would not be right after p.</p>
<p>3. By guaranteeing amortized constant complexity only when t is inserted
after p, it is impossible to guarantee constant complexity if t is inserted at
the beginning of the container. Such a problem would not exist if amortized
constant complexity was guaranteed if t is inserted before p, since there is
always some p immediately before which an insert can take place.</p>
<p>4. For a container with equivalent keys, p does not allow specification of
where to insert the element, but rather only acts as a hint for improving
performance. This negates the added functionality that p would provide if it
specified where within a sequence of equivalent keys the insertion should occur.
Specifying the insert location provides more control to the user, while
providing no disadvantage to the container implementation.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] paragraph 7, replace the row in table 69
for a.insert(p,t) with the following two rows:</p>
<table border="1" cellpadding="5">
  <tbody><tr>
    <td><b>expression</b></td>
    <td><b>return type</b></td>
    <td><b>pre/post-condition</b></td>
    <td><b>complexity</b></td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><tt>a_uniq.insert(p,t)</tt></td>
    <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
    <td>inserts t if and only if there is no element with key equivalent to the
      key of t. returns the iterator pointing to the element with key equivalent
      to the key of t.</td>
    <td>logarithmic in general, but amortized constant if t is inserted right
      before p or p points to an element with key equivalent to t.</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><tt>a_eq.insert(p,t)</tt></td>
    <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
    <td>inserts t and returns the iterator pointing to the newly inserted
      element. t is inserted right before p if doing so preserves the container
      ordering.</td>
    <td>logarithmic in general, but amortized constant if t is inserted right
      before p.</td>
  </tr>
</tbody></table>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Too big a change.&nbsp; Furthermore, implementors report checking
both before p and after p, and don't want to change this behavior.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="194"></a>194. rdbuf() functions poorly specified</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.5.4 [ios] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 1999-09-07 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In classic iostreams, base class ios had an rdbuf function that returned a
pointer to the associated streambuf. Each derived class had its own rdbuf
function that returned a pointer of a type reflecting the actual type derived
from streambuf. Because in ARM C++, virtual function overrides had to have the
same return type, rdbuf could not be virtual.</p>
<p>In standard iostreams, we retain the non-virtual rdbuf function design, and
in addition have an overloaded rdbuf function that sets the buffer pointer.
There is no need for the second function to be virtual nor to be implemented in
derived classes.</p>
<p>Minor question: Was there a specific reason not to make the original rdbuf
function virtual?</p>
<p>Major problem: Friendly compilers warn about functions in derived classes
that hide base-class overloads. Any standard implementation of iostreams will
result in such a warning on each of the iostream classes, because of the
ill-considered decision to overload rdbuf only in a base class.</p>
<p>In addition, users of the second rdbuf function must use explicit
qualification or a cast to call it from derived classes. An explicit
qualification or cast to basic_ios would prevent access to any later overriding
version if there was one.</p>
<p>What I'd like to do in an implementation is add a using- declaration for the
second rdbuf function in each derived class. It would eliminate warnings about
hiding functions, and would enable access without using explicit qualification.
Such a change I don't think would change the behavior of any valid program, but
would allow invalid programs to compile:</p>
<blockquote>
  <pre> filebuf mybuf;
 fstream f;
 f.rdbuf(mybuf); // should be an error, no visible rdbuf</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I'd like to suggest this problem as a defect, with the proposed resolution to
require the equivalent of a using-declaration for the rdbuf function that is not
replaced in a later derived class. We could discuss whether replacing the
function should be allowed.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>For historical reasons, the standard is correct as written. There is a subtle difference between the base
class <tt> rdbuf()</tt> and derived class <tt>rdbuf()</tt>. The derived
class <tt> rdbuf()</tt> always returns the original streambuf, whereas the base class
<tt> rdbuf()</tt> will return the "current streambuf" if that has been changed by the variant you mention.</p>

<p>Permission is not required to add such an extension.  See 
17.6.4.5 [member.functions].</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="196"></a>196. Placement new example has alignment problems</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#114">114</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The example in 18.6.1.3 [new.delete.placement] paragraph 4 reads: </p>

<blockquote>

<p>[Example: This can be useful for constructing an object at a known address:<br>
<br>
<tt>&nbsp;&nbsp; char place[sizeof(Something)];<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp; Something* p = new (place) Something();<br>
<br>
</tt>end example] </p>

</blockquote>

<p>This example has potential alignment problems. </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="197"></a>197. max_size() underspecified</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements], 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-10-21 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Must the value returned by max_size() be unchanged from call to call? </p>

<p>Must the value returned from max_size() be meaningful? </p>

<p>Possible meanings identified in lib-6827: </p>

<p>1) The largest container the implementation can support given "best
case" conditions - i.e. assume the run-time platform is "configured to
the max", and no overhead from the program itself. This may possibly
be determined at the point the library is written, but certainly no
later than compile time.<br>
<br>
2) The largest container the program could create, given "best case"
conditions - i.e. same platform assumptions as (1), but take into
account any overhead for executing the program itself. (or, roughly
"storage=storage-sizeof(program)"). This does NOT include any resource
allocated by the program. This may (or may not) be determinable at
compile time.<br>
<br>
3) The largest container the current execution of the program could
create, given knowledge of the actual run-time platform, but again,
not taking into account any currently allocated resource. This is
probably best determined at program start-up.<br>
<br>
4) The largest container the current execution program could create at
the point max_size() is called (or more correctly at the point
max_size() returns :-), given it's current environment (i.e. taking
into account the actual currently available resources). This,
obviously, has to be determined dynamically each time max_size() is
called. </p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>max_size() isn't useful for very many things, and the existing
  wording is sufficiently clear for the few cases that max_size() can
  be used for.  None of the attempts to change the existing wording
  were an improvement.</p>

<p>It is clear to the LWG that the value returned by max_size() can't
  change from call to call.</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="203"></a>203. basic_istream::sentry::sentry() is uninstantiable with ctype&lt;user-defined type&gt;</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt McClure and Dietmar K�hl <b>Opened:</b> 2000-01-01 <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::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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>27.6.1.1.2 Paragraph 4 states:</p>
<blockquote>
  <p>To decide if the character c is a whitespace character, the constructor      
     performs ''as if'' it executes the following code fragment:&nbsp;</p>
  <pre>const ctype&lt;charT&gt;&amp; ctype = use_facet&lt;ctype&lt;charT&gt; &gt;(is.getloc());
if (ctype.is(ctype.space,c)!=0)
// c is a whitespace character.</pre>
</blockquote>

<p> But Table 51 in 22.1.1.1.1 only requires an implementation to
provide specializations for ctype&lt;char&gt; and
ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt;.  If sentry's constructor is implemented using
ctype, it will be uninstantiable for a user-defined character type
charT, unless the implementation has provided non-working (since it
would be impossible to define a correct ctype&lt;charT&gt; specialization
for an arbitrary charT) definitions of ctype's virtual member
functions.</p>

<p>
It seems the intent the standard is that sentry should behave, in
every respect, not just during execution, as if it were implemented
using ctype, with the burden of providing a ctype specialization
falling on the user.  But as it is written, nothing requires the
translation of sentry's constructor to behave as if it used the above
code, and it would seem therefore, that sentry's constructor should be
instantiable for all character types.
</p>

<p> 
Note: If I have misinterpreted the intent of the standard with
respect to sentry's constructor's instantiability, then a note should
be added to the following effect:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
An implementation is forbidden from using the above code if it renders
the constructor uninstantiable for an otherwise valid character
type.
</p></blockquote>

<p>In any event, some clarification is needed.</p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>It is possible but not easy to instantiate on types other than char
or wchar_t; many things have to be done first. That is by intention
and is not a defect.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="204"></a>204. distance(first, last) when "last" is before "first"</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Rintala Matti <b>Opened:</b> 2000-01-28 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Section 24.3.4 describes the function distance(first, last) (where first and
last are iterators) which calculates "the number of increments or
decrements needed to get from 'first' to 'last'".</p>
<p>The function should work for forward, bidirectional and random access
iterators, and there is a requirement 24.3.4.5 which states that "'last'
must be reachable from 'first'".</p>
<p>With random access iterators the function is easy to implement as "last
- first".</p>
<p>With forward iterators it's clear that 'first' must point to a place before
'last', because otherwise 'last' would not be reachable from 'first'.</p>
<p>But what about bidirectional iterators? There 'last' is reachable from
'first' with the -- operator even if 'last' points to an earlier position than
'first'. However, I cannot see how the distance() function could be implemented
if the implementation does not know which of the iterators points to an earlier
position (you cannot use ++ or -- on either iterator if you don't know which
direction is the "safe way to travel").</p>
<p>The paragraph 24.3.4.1 states that "for ... bidirectional iterators they
use ++ to provide linear time implementations". However, the ++ operator is
not mentioned in the reachability requirement. Furthermore 24.3.4.4 explicitly
mentions that distance() returns the number of increments _or decrements_,
suggesting that it could return a negative number also for bidirectional
iterators when 'last' points to a position before 'first'.</p>
<p>Is a further requirement is needed to state that for forward and
bidirectional iterators "'last' must be reachable from 'first' using the ++
operator". Maybe this requirement might also apply to random access
iterators so that distance() would work the same way for every iterator
category?</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>"Reachable" is defined in the standard in X [iterator.concepts] paragraph 6.
The definition is only in terms of operator++(). The LWG sees no defect in
the standard.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="205"></a>205.  numeric_limits unclear on how to determine 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Cleary <b>Opened:</b> 2000-01-28 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In several places in 18.3.1.2 [numeric.limits.members], a member is
described as "Meaningful for all floating point types."
However, no clear method of determining a floating point type is
provided.</p>

<p>In 18.3.1.5 [numeric.special], paragraph 1 states ". . . (for
example, epsilon() is only meaningful if is_integer is
false). . ." which suggests that a type is a floating point type
if is_specialized is true and is_integer is false; however, this is
unclear.</p>

<p>When clarifying this, please keep in mind this need of users: what
exactly is the definition of floating point? Would a fixed point or
rational representation be considered one? I guess my statement here
is that there could also be types that are neither integer or
(strictly) floating point.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>It is up to the implementor of a user define type to decide if it is a
floating point type.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="207"></a>207. ctype&lt;char&gt; members return clause incomplete</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 1999-11-02 <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.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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#153">153</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>widen</tt> and <tt>narrow</tt> member functions are described
in 22.2.1.3.2, paragraphs 9-11.  In each case we have two overloaded
signatures followed by a <b>Returns</b> clause.  The <b>Returns</b>
clause only describes one of the overloads.
</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>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Returns: do_widen(low, high, to).</p>

<p>to:</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Returns: do_widen(c) or do_widen(low, high, to), 
respectively.</p>

<p>Change the returns clause in 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members] paragraph 11
from:</p> 
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Returns: do_narrow(low, high, to).</p>

<p>to:</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Returns: do_narrow(c) or do_narrow(low, high, to), 
respectively.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Subsumed by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#153">153</a>, which addresses the same
paragraphs.</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="213"></a>213. Math function overloads ambiguous</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Due to the additional overloaded versions of numeric functions for
float and long double according to Section 26.5, calls such as int x;
std::pow (x, 4) are ambiguous now in a standard conforming
implementation. Current implementations solve this problem very
different (overload for all types, don't overload for float and long
double, use preprocessor, follow the standard and get
ambiguities).</p> <p>This behavior should be standardized or at least
identified as implementation defined.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>These math issues are an
understood and accepted consequence of the design. They have
been discussed several times in the past. Users must write casts
or write floating point expressions as arguments.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="215"></a>215. Can a map's key_type be const?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 2000-02-29 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>A user noticed that this doesn't compile with the Rogue Wave library because
the rb_tree class declares a key_allocator, and allocator&lt;const int&gt; is
not legal, I think:</p>
<blockquote>
  <pre>map &lt; const int, ... &gt; // legal?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>which made me wonder whether it is legal for a map's key_type to be const. In
email from Matt Austern he said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I'm not sure whether it's legal to declare a map with a const key type. I
hadn't thought about that question until a couple weeks ago. My intuitive
feeling is that it ought not to be allowed, and that the standard ought to say
so. It does turn out to work in SGI's library, though, and someone in the
compiler group even used it. Perhaps this deserves to be written up as an issue
too.</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The "key is assignable" requirement from table 69 in
23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] already implies the key cannot be const.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="216"></a>216. setbase manipulator description flawed</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Hyman Rosen <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#193">193</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>27.7.3 [std.manip] paragraph 5 says:</p>
<blockquote>
<pre>smanip setbase(int base);</pre>
<p> Returns: An object s of unspecified type such that if out is an
(instance of) basic_ostream then the expression out&lt;&lt;s behaves
as if f(s) were called, in is an (instance of) basic_istream then the
expression in&gt;&gt;s behaves as if f(s) were called. Where f can be
defined as:</p>
<pre>ios_base&amp; f(ios_base&amp; str, int base)
{
  // set basefield
  str.setf(n == 8 ? ios_base::oct :
                n == 10 ? ios_base::dec :
                n == 16 ? ios_base::hex :
                  ios_base::fmtflags(0), ios_base::basefield);
  return str;
}</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>There are two problems here. First, f takes two parameters, so the
description needs to say that out&lt;&lt;s and in&gt;&gt;s behave as if f(s,base)
had been called. Second, f is has a parameter named base, but is written as if
the parameter was named n.</p>
<p>Actually, there's a third problem. The paragraph has grammatical errors.
There needs to be an "and" after the first comma, and the "Where
f" sentence fragment needs to be merged into its preceding sentence. You
may also want to format the function a little better. The formatting above is
more-or-less what the Standard contains.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The resolution of this defect is subsumed by the proposed resolution for
issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#193">193</a>.</p>

<p><i>[Tokyo: The LWG agrees that this is a defect and notes that it
occurs additional places in the section, all requiring fixes.]</i></p>








<hr>
<h3><a name="218"></a>218. Algorithms do not use binary predicate objects for default comparisons</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-06 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Many of the algorithms take an argument, pred, of template parameter type
BinaryPredicate or an argument comp of template parameter type Compare. These
algorithms usually have an overloaded version that does not take the predicate
argument. In these cases pred is usually replaced by the use of operator== and
comp is replaced by the use of operator&lt;.</p>
<p>This use of hard-coded operators is inconsistent with other parts of the
library, particularly the containers library, where equality is established
using equal_to&lt;&gt; and ordering is established using less&lt;&gt;. Worse,
the use of operator&lt;, would cause the following innocent-looking code to have
undefined behavior:</p>
<blockquote>
  <pre>vector&lt;string*&gt; vec;
sort(vec.begin(), vec.end());</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>The use of operator&lt; is not defined for pointers to unrelated objects. If
std::sort used less&lt;&gt; to compare elements, then the above code would be
well-defined, since less&lt;&gt; is explicitly specialized to produce a total
ordering of pointers.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This use of operator== and operator&lt; was a very deliberate, conscious, and
explicitly made design decision; these operators are often more efficient. The
predicate forms are available for users who don't want to rely on operator== and
operator&lt;.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="219"></a>219. find algorithm missing version that takes a binary predicate argument</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.5 [alg.find] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2000-03-06 <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#alg.find">issues</a> in [alg.find].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The find function always searches for a value using operator== to compare the
value argument to each element in the input iterator range. This is inconsistent
with other find-related functions such as find_end and find_first_of, which
allow the caller to specify a binary predicate object to be used for determining
equality. The fact that this can be accomplished using a combination of find_if
and bind_1st or bind_2nd does not negate the desirability of a consistent,
simple, alternative interface to find.</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Reopened by Alisdair.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The same thing can be achieved using find_if (as noted in the issue).
</p>
<p>
Moved to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<blockquote>
<p>In section 25.2.5 [alg.find], add a second prototype for find
(between the existing prototype and the prototype for find_if), as
follows:</p>
<pre>    template&lt;class InputIterator, class T, class BinaryPredicate&gt;
      InputIterator find(InputIterator first, InputIterator last,
                         const T&amp; value, BinaryPredicate bin_pred);</pre>
<p>Change the description of the return from:</p>
<blockquote>
  <p>Returns: The first iterator i in the range [first, last) for which the following corresponding
  conditions hold: *i == value, pred(*i) != false. Returns last if no such iterator is found.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;to:</p>
<blockquote>
  <p>Returns: The first iterator i in the range [first, last) for which the following&nbsp;
  corresponding condition holds: *i == value, bin_pred(*i,value) != false, pred(*)
  != false. Return last if no such iterator is found.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is request for a pure extension, so it is not a defect in the
current standard.&nbsp; As the submitter pointed out, "this can
be accomplished using a combination of find_if and bind_1st or
bind_2nd".</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="236"></a>236. ctype&lt;char&gt;::is() member modifies facet</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#28">28</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The description of the <tt>is()</tt> member in paragraph 4 of 22.4.1.3.2 [facet.ctype.char.members] is broken: According to this description, the
second form of the <tt>is()</tt> method modifies the masks in the
<tt>ctype</tt> object. The correct semantics if, of course, to obtain
an array of masks. The corresponding method in the general case,
ie. the <tt>do_is()</tt> method as described in 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals] paragraph 1 does the right thing.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
  <p>Change paragraph 4 from</p>
    <blockquote><p>
    The second form, for all *p in the range [low, high), assigns
    vec[p-low] to table()[(unsigned char)*p].
    </p></blockquote>
  <p>to become</p>
    <blockquote><p>
    The second form, for all *p in the range [low, high), assigns
    table()[(unsigned char)*p] to vec[p-low].
  </p></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="244"></a>244. Must <tt>find</tt>'s third argument be CopyConstructible?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2.5 [alg.find] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-02 <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.find">issues</a> in [alg.find].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Is the following implementation of <tt>find</tt> acceptable?</p>

<pre>        template&lt;class Iter, class X&gt;
        Iter find(Iter begin, Iter end, const X&amp; x)
        {
            X x1 = x;           // this is the crucial statement
            while (begin != end &amp;&amp; *begin != x1)
                ++begin;
            return begin;
        }
</pre>

<p>If the answer is yes, then it is implementation-dependent as to
whether the following fragment is well formed:</p>

<pre>        vector&lt;string&gt; v;

        find(v.begin(), v.end(), "foo");
</pre>

<p>At issue is whether there is a requirement that the third argument
of find be CopyConstructible.  There may be no problem here, but
analysis is necessary.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>There is no indication in the standard that find's third argument
is required to be Copy Constructible.  The LWG believes that no such
requirement was intended.  As noted above, there are times when a user
might reasonably pass an argument that is not Copy Constructible.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="245"></a>245. Which operations on <tt>istream_iterator</tt> trigger input operations?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-02 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>I do not think the standard specifies what operation(s) on istream
iterators trigger input operations.  So, for example:</p>

<pre>        istream_iterator&lt;int&gt; i(cin);

        int n = *i++;
</pre>

<p>I do not think it is specified how many integers have been read
from cin.  The number must be at least 1, of course, but can it be 2?
More?</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The standard is clear as written: the stream is read every time
operator++ is called, and it is also read either when the iterator is
constructed or when operator* is called for the first time.  In the
example above, exactly two integers are read from cin.</p>

<p>There may be a problem with the interaction between istream_iterator
and some STL algorithms, such as find.  There are no guarantees about
how many times find may invoke operator++.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="246"></a>246. <tt>a.insert(p,t)</tt> is incorrectly specified</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Mark Rodgers <b>Opened:</b> 2000-05-19 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#233">233</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Closed issue 192 raised several problems with the specification of
this function, but was rejected as Not A Defect because it was too big
a change with unacceptable impacts on existing implementations.
However, issues remain that could be addressed with a smaller change
and with little or no consequent impact.</p>

<ol>
   <li><p> The specification is inconsistent with the original
   proposal and with several implementations.</p>

   <p>The initial implementation by Hewlett Packard only ever looked
   immediately <i>before</i> p, and I do not believe there was any
   intention to standardize anything other than this behavior.
   Consequently, current implementations by several leading
   implementors also look immediately before p, and will only insert
   after p in logarithmic time.  I am only aware of one implementation
   that does actually look after p, and it looks before p as well.  It
   is therefore doubtful that existing code would be relying on the
   behavior defined in the standard, and it would seem that fixing
   this defect as proposed below would standardize existing
   practice.</p></li>

   <li><p>
   The specification is inconsistent with insertion for sequence
   containers.</p>

   <p>This is difficult and confusing to teach to newcomers.  All
   insert operations that specify an iterator as an insertion location
   should have a consistent meaning for the location represented by
   that iterator.</p></li>

   <li><p> As specified, there is no way to hint that the insertion
   should occur at the beginning of the container, and the way to hint
   that it should occur at the end is long winded and unnatural.</p>

   <p>For a container containing n elements, there are n+1 possible
   insertion locations and n+1 valid iterators.  For there to be a
   one-to-one mapping between iterators and insertion locations, the
   iterator must represent an insertion location immediately before
   the iterator.</p></li>

   <li><p> When appending sorted ranges using insert_iterators,
   insertions are guaranteed to be sub-optimal.</p>

   <p>In such a situation, the optimum location for insertion is
   always immediately after the element previously inserted.  The
   mechanics of the insert iterator guarantee that it will try and
   insert after the element after that, which will never be correct.
   However, if the container first tried to insert before the hint,
   all insertions would be performed in amortized constant
   time.</p></li>
</ol>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>In 23.1.2 [lib.associative.reqmts] paragraph 7, table 69, make
the following changes in the row for a.insert(p,t):</p>

<p><i>assertion/note pre/post condition:</i>
<br>Change the last sentence from</p>
     <blockquote><p>
     "iterator p is a hint pointing to where the insert should
     start to search."
     </p></blockquote>
<p>to</p>
     <blockquote><p>
     "iterator p is a hint indicating that immediately before p
     may be a correct location where the insertion could occur."
     </p></blockquote>

<p><i>complexity:</i><br>
Change the words "right after" to "immediately before".</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="249"></a>249. Return Type of <tt>auto_ptr::operator=</tt></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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Joseph Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2000-06-30 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>According to section 20.4.5, the function
<tt>auto_ptr::operator=()</tt> returns a reference to an auto_ptr.
The reason that <tt>operator=()</tt> usually returns a reference is to
facilitate code like</p>

<pre>    int x,y,z;
    x = y = z = 1;
</pre>

<p>However, given analogous code for <tt>auto_ptr</tt>s,</p>
<pre>    auto_ptr&lt;int&gt; x, y, z;
    z.reset(new int(1));
    x = y = z;
</pre>

<p>the result would be that <tt>z</tt> and <tt>y</tt> would both be set to 
NULL, instead of all the <tt>auto_ptr</tt>s being set to the same value. 
This makes such cascading assignments useless and counterintuitive for 
<tt>auto_ptr</tt>s.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Change <tt>auto_ptr::operator=()</tt> to return <tt>void</tt> instead
of an <tt>auto_ptr</tt> reference.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The return value has uses other than cascaded assignments: a user can
call an auto_ptr member function, pass the auto_ptr to a
function, etc.  Removing the return value could break working user
code.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="255"></a>255. Why do <tt>basic_streambuf&lt;&gt;::pbump()</tt> and <tt>gbump()</tt> take an int?</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-12 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The basic_streambuf members gbump() and pbump() are specified to take an
int argument. This requirement prevents the functions from effectively
manipulating buffers larger than std::numeric_limits&lt;int&gt;::max()
characters. It also makes the common use case for these functions
somewhat difficult as many compilers will issue a warning when an
argument of type larger than int (such as ptrdiff_t on LLP64
architectures) is passed to either of the function. Since it's often the
result of the subtraction of two pointers that is passed to the
functions, a cast is necessary to silence such warnings. Finally, the
usage of a native type in the functions signatures is inconsistent with
other member functions (such as sgetn() and sputn()) that manipulate the
underlying character buffer. Those functions take a streamsize argument.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is part of a bigger problem. If anyone cares enough, they should
write a paper solving the bigger problem of offset types in iostreams.
</p>
<p>
This is related to the paper about large file sizes. Beman has already
agreed to drop the section of that paper that deals with this.
</p>
<p>
int is big enough for reasonable buffers.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Future.
</p>
<p>
This is related to LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#423">423</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the signatures of these functions in the synopsis of template
class basic_streambuf (27.5.2) and in their descriptions (27.5.2.3.1, p4
and 27.5.2.3.2, p4) to take a streamsize argument.
</p>

<p>
Although this change has the potential of changing the ABI of the
library, the change will affect only platforms where int is different
than the definition of streamsize. However, since both functions are
typically inline (they are on all known implementations), even on such
platforms the change will not affect any user code unless it explicitly
relies on the existing type of the functions (e.g., by taking their
address). Such a possibility is IMO quite remote.
</p>

<p>
Alternate Suggestion from Howard Hinnant, c++std-lib-7780:
</p>

<p>
This is something of a nit, but I'm wondering if streamoff wouldn't be a 
better choice than streamsize.  The argument to pbump and gbump MUST be 
signed.  But the standard has this to say about streamsize 
(27.4.1/2/Footnote):
</p>

<blockquote><p>
     [Footnote: streamsize is used in most places where ISO C would use
     size_t.  Most of the uses of streamsize could use size_t, except for
     the strstreambuf constructors, which require negative values. It
     should probably be the signed type corresponding to size_t (which is
     what Posix.2 calls ssize_t). --- end footnote]
</p></blockquote>

<p>
This seems a little weak for the argument to pbump and gbump.  Should we 
ever really get rid of strstream, this footnote might go with it, along 
with the reason to make streamsize signed.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes this change is too big for now.  We may wish to
reconsider this for a future revision of the standard.  One
possibility is overloading pbump, rather than changing the
signature.</p>
<p><i>[
[2006-05-04: Reopened at the request of Chris (Krzysztof ?elechowski)]
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="257"></a>257. STL functional object and iterator inheritance.</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [base], 24.4.2 [iterator.basic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Dick  <b>Opened:</b> 2000-08-17 <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#base">issues</a> in [base].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to the November 1997 Draft Standard, the results of deleting an
object of a derived class through a pointer to an object of its base class are
undefined if the base class has a non-virtual destructor.  Therefore, it is
potentially dangerous to publicly inherit from such base classes.
</p>

<p>Defect:
<br>
The STL design encourages users to publicly inherit from a number of classes
which do nothing but specify interfaces, and which contain non-virtual
destructors.
</p>

<p>Attribution:
<br>
Wil Evers and William E. Kempf suggested this modification for functional
objects.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
When a base class in the standard library is useful only as an interface
specifier, i.e., when an object of the class will never be directly
instantiated, specify that the class contains a protected destructor.  This
will prevent deletion through a pointer to the base class without performance,
or space penalties (on any implementation I'm aware of).
</p>

<p>
As an example, replace...
</p>

<pre>    template &lt;class Arg, class Result&gt;
    struct unary_function {
            typedef Arg    argument_type;
            typedef Result result_type;
    };
</pre>

<p>
... with...
</p>

<pre>    template &lt;class Arg, class Result&gt;
    struct unary_function {
            typedef Arg    argument_type;
            typedef Result result_type;
    protected:
            ~unary_function() {}
    };
</pre>

<p>
Affected definitions:
<br>
  &nbsp;20.3.1 [lib.function.objects] -- unary_function, binary_function
  <br>
  &nbsp;24.3.2 [lib.iterator.basic] -- iterator
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The standard is clear as written; this is a request for change, not a
defect in the strict sense.  The LWG had several different objections
to the proposed change.  One is that it would prevent users from
creating objects of type <tt>unary_function</tt> and
<tt>binary_function</tt>.  Doing so can sometimes be legitimate, if users
want to pass temporaries as traits or tag types in generic code.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="267"></a>267. interaction of strstreambuf::overflow() and seekoff()</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
It appears that the interaction of the strstreambuf members overflow()
and seekoff() can lead to undefined behavior in cases where defined
behavior could reasonably be expected. The following program
demonstrates this behavior:
</p>

<pre>    #include &lt;strstream&gt;

    int main ()
    {
         std::strstreambuf sb;
         sb.sputc ('c');

         sb.pubseekoff (-1, std::ios::end, std::ios::in);
         return !('c' == sb.sgetc ());
    }
</pre>

<p>
D.7.1.1, p1 initializes strstreambuf with a call to basic_streambuf&lt;&gt;(),
which in turn sets all pointers to 0 in 27.5.2.1, p1.
</p>
 
<p>
27.5.2.2.5, p1 says that basic_streambuf&lt;&gt;::sputc(c) calls
overflow(traits::to_int_type(c)) if a write position isn't available (it
isn't due to the above).
</p>

<p>
D.7.1.3, p3 says that strstreambuf::overflow(off, ..., ios::in) makes at
least one write position available (i.e., it allows the function to make
any positive number of write positions available).
</p>

<p>
D.7.1.3, p13 computes newoff = seekhigh - eback(). In D.7.1, p4 we see
seekhigh = epptr() ? epptr() : egptr(), or seekhigh = epptr() in this
case. newoff is then epptr() - eback().
</p>

<p>
D.7.1.4, p14 sets gptr() so that gptr() == eback() + newoff + off, or
gptr() == epptr() + off holds.
</p>

<p>
If strstreambuf::overflow() made exactly one write position available
then gptr() will be set to just before epptr(), and the program will
return 0. Buf if the function made more than one write position
available, epptr() and gptr() will both point past pptr() and the
behavior of the program is undefined.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


   <p>Change the last sentence of D.9.1 [depr.strstreambuf] paragraph 4 from</p>

      <blockquote><p>
      Otherwise, seeklow equals gbeg and seekhigh is either pend, if
      pend is not a null pointer, or gend.
      </p></blockquote>

   <p>to become</p>

      <blockquote><p>
      Otherwise, seeklow equals gbeg and seekhigh is either gend if
      0 == pptr(), or pbase() + max where max is the maximum value of
      pptr() - pbase() ever reached for this stream.
      </p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
  pre-Copenhagen: Dietmar provided wording for proposed resolution.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
  post-Copenhagen: Fixed a typo: proposed resolution said to fix
  4.7.1, not D.7.1.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is related to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#65">65</a>: it's not clear what it
means to seek beyond the current area.  Without resolving issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#65">65</a> we can't resolve this.  As with issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#65">65</a>, 
the library working group does not wish to invest time nailing down
corner cases in a deprecated feature.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="269"></a>269. cstdarg and unnamed parameters</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8 [support.exception] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> J. Stephen Adamczyk <b>Opened:</b> 2000-10-10 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
One of our customers asks whether this is valid C++:
</p>

<pre>   #include &lt;cstdarg&gt;

   void bar(const char *, va_list);

   void
   foo(const char *file, const char *, ...)
   {
     va_list ap;
     va_start(ap, file);
     bar(file, ap);
     va_end(ap);
   }
</pre>

<p>
The issue being whether it is valid to use cstdarg when the final
parameter before the "..." is unnamed.  cstdarg is, as far
as I can tell, inherited verbatim from the C standard. and the
definition there (7.8.1.1 in the ISO C89 standard) refers to "the
identifier of the rightmost parameter".  What happens when there
is no such identifier?
</p>

<p>
My personal opinion is that this should be allowed, but some tweak
might be required in the C++ standard.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Not a defect, the C and C++ standards are clear.  It is impossible to
use varargs if the parameter immediately before "..." has no
name, because that is the parameter that must be passed to va_start.
The example given above is broken, because va_start is being passed
the wrong parameter.
</p>

<p>
There is no support for extending varargs to provide additional
functionality beyond what's currently there.  For reasons of C/C++
compatibility, it is especially important not to make gratuitous
changes in this part of the C++ standard.  The C committee has already
been requested not to touch this part of the C standard unless
necessary.
</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="277"></a>277. Normative encouragement in allocator requirements unclear</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.1.5, paragraph 5, the standard says that "Implementors are
encouraged to supply libraries that can accept allocators that
encapsulate more general memory models and that support non-equal
instances." This is intended as normative encouragement to
standard library implementors.  However, it is possible to interpret
this sentence as applying to nonstandard third-party libraries.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.1.5, paragraph 5, change "Implementors" to
"Implementors of the library described in this International
Standard".
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes the normative encouragement is already
sufficiently clear, and that there are no important consequences
even if it is misunderstood.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="279"></a>279. const and non-const iterators should have equivalent typedefs</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Cleary <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#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#NAD">NAD</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 believes it should be a separate issue.
</p>

<p>
Steve said: "We may want to state that the const/non-const iterators must have
the same difference type, size_type, and category."
</p>

<p>
(Comment from Judy)
I'm not sure if the above sentence should be true for all
const and non-const iterators in a particular container, or if it means 
the container's iterator can't be compared with the container's
const_iterator unless the above it true. I suspect the former.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In <b>Section:</b> 23.2 [container.requirements],
table 65, in the assertion/note pre/post condition for X::const_iterator,
add the following:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
typeid(X::const_iterator::difference_type) == typeid(X::iterator::difference_type)
</p>

<p>
typeid(X::const_iterator::size_type) == typeid(X::iterator::size_type)
</p>

<p>
typeid(X::const_iterator::category) == typeid(X::iterator::category)
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Going through the types one by one: Iterators don't have a
<tt>size_type</tt>.  We already know that the difference types are
identical, because the container requirements already say that the
difference types of both X::iterator and X::const_iterator are both
X::difference_type.  The standard does not require that X::iterator
and X::const_iterator have the same iterator category, but the LWG
does not see this as a defect: it's possible to imagine cases in which
it would be useful for the categories to be different.</p>

<p>It may be desirable to require X::iterator and X::const_iterator to
have the same value type, but that is a new issue. (Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#322">322</a>.)</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="287"></a>287. conflicting ios_base fmtflags</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The Effects clause for ios_base::setf(fmtflags fmtfl) says
"Sets fmtfl in flags()".  What happens if the user first calls
ios_base::scientific and then calls ios_base::fixed or vice-versa?
This is an issue for all of the conflicting flags, i.e. ios_base::left
and ios_base::right or ios_base::dec, ios_base::hex and ios_base::oct.
</p>

<p>
I see three possible solutions: 
</p>

<ol>
<li>Set ios_base::failbit whenever the user specifies a conflicting
flag with one previously explicitly set. If the constructor is
supposed to set ios_base::dec (see discussion below), then
the user setting hex or oct format after construction will not
set failbit. </li>
<li>The last call to setf "wins", i.e. it clears any conflicting
previous setting.</li>
<li>All the flags that the user specifies are set, but when actually 
interpreting them, fixed always override scientific, right always 
overrides left, dec overrides hex which overrides oct.</li>
</ol>

<p>
Most existing implementations that I tried seem to conform to resolution #3,
except that when using the iomanip manipulator hex or oct then that always 
overrides dec, but calling setf(ios_base::hex) doesn't. 
</p>

<p>
There is a sort of related issue, which is that although the ios_base
constructor says that each ios_base member has an indeterminate value
after construction, all the existing implementations I tried explicitly set 
ios_base::dec.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>adjustfield</tt>, <tt>basefield</tt>, and <tt>floatfield</tt>
are each multi-bit fields.  It is possible to set multiple bits within
each of those fields.  (For example, <tt>dec</tt> and
<tt>oct</tt>). These fields are used by locale facets.  The LWG
reviewed the way in which each of those three fields is used, and
believes that in each case the behavior is well defined for any
possible combination of bits.  See for example Table 58, in 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals], noting the requirement in paragraph 6 of that
section.
</p>
<p>
Users are advised to use manipulators, or else use the two-argument
version of <tt>setf</tt>, to avoid unexpected behavior.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="289"></a>289. &lt;cmath&gt; requirements missing C float and long double versions</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
    In ISO/IEC 9899:1990 Programming Languages C we find the following
    concerning &lt;math.h&gt;:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
         7.13.4 Mathematics &lt;math.h&gt;
         <br>
         The names of all existing functions declared in the &lt;math.h&gt;
         header, suffixed with f or l, are reserved respectively for
         corresponding functions with float and long double arguments
         are return values.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
    For example, <tt>float&nbsp;sinf(float)</tt>
    is reserved.
</p>

<p>
    In the C99 standard, &lt;math.h&gt; must contain declarations
    for these functions.
</p>

<p>
So, is it acceptable for an implementor to add these prototypes to the
C++ versions of the math headers? Are they required?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add these Functions to Table 80, section 26.5 and to Table 99,
section C.2:
</p>

<pre>    acosf asinf atanf atan2f ceilf cosf coshf 
    expf fabsf floorf fmodf frexpf ldexpf 
    logf log10f modff powf sinf sinhf sqrtf 
    tanf tanhf 
    acosl asinl atanl atan2l ceill cosl coshl 
    expl fabsl floorl fmodl frexpl ldexpl 
    logl log10l modfl powl sinl sinhl sqrtl 
    tanl tanhl
</pre>

<p>
There should probably be a note saying that these functions
are optional and, if supplied, should match the description in
the 1999 version of the C standard. In the next round
of C++ standardization they can then become mandatory. 
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The C90 standard, as amended, already permits (but does not
require) these functions, and the C++ standard incorporates the
C90 standard by reference.  C99 is not an issue, because it is
never referred to by the C++ standard.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="290"></a>290. Requirements to for_each and its function object</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The specification of the for_each algorithm does not have a
"Requires" section, which means that there are no
restrictions imposed on the function object whatsoever. In essence it
means that I can provide any function object with arbitrary side
effects and I can still expect a predictable result. In particular I
can expect that the function object is applied exactly last - first
times, which is promised in the "Complexity" section.
</p>

<p>I don't see how any implementation can give such a guarantee
without imposing requirements on the function object.
</p>

<p>Just as an example: consider a function object that removes
elements from the input sequence.  In that case, what does the
complexity guarantee (applies f exactly last - first times) mean?
</p>

<p>One can argue that this is obviously a nonsensical application and
a theoretical case, which unfortunately it isn't.  I have seen
programmers shooting themselves in the foot this way, and they did not
understand that there are restrictions even if the description of the
algorithm does not say so.
</p>
<p><i>[Lillehammer: This is more general than for_each.  We don't want
  the function object in transform invalidiating iterators
  either. There should be a note somewhere in clause 17 (17, not 25)
  saying that user code operating on a range may not invalidate
  iterators unless otherwise specified.  Bill will provide wording.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Moved to NAD.
</p>
<p>
It was felt that the current description is adequate, and that there are
limits to what the standard can reasonably say to prohibit perverse uses
of the library.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="293"></a>293. Order of execution in transform algorithm</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.3.4 [alg.transform] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Angelika Langer <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-04 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>This issue is related to issue 242.  In case that the resolution
proposed for issue 242 is accepted, we have have the following
situation: The 4 numeric algorithms (accumulate and consorts) as well
as transform would allow a certain category of side effects.  The
numeric algorithms specify that they invoke the functor "for
every iterator i in the range [first, last) in order". transform,
in contrast, would not give any guarantee regarding order of
invocation of the functor, which means that the functor can be invoked
in any arbitrary order.
</p>

<p>Why would that be a problem?  Consider an example: say the
transformator that is a simple enumerator ( or more generally
speaking, "is order-sensitive" ).  Since a standard
compliant implementation of transform is free to invoke the enumerator
in no definite order, the result could be a garbled enumeration.
Strictly speaking this is not a problem, but it is certainly at odds
with the prevalent understanding of transform as an algorithms that
assigns "a new _corresponding_ value" to the output
elements.
</p>

<p>All implementations that I know of invoke the transformator in
definite order, namely starting from first and proceeding to last -
1. Unless there is an optimization conceivable that takes advantage of
the indefinite order I would suggest to specify the order, because it
eliminate the uncertainty that users would otherwise have regarding
the order of execution of their potentially order-sensitive function
objects.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>In section 25.2.3 - Transform [lib.alg.transform] change:</p>
<blockquote><p>
-1- Effects: Assigns through every iterator i in the range [result,
result + (last1 - first1)) a new corresponding
value equal to op(*(first1 + (i - result)) or binary_op(*(first1 +
(i - result), *(first2 + (i - result))).
</p></blockquote>
<p>to:</p>
<blockquote><p>
-1- Effects: Computes values by  invoking the operation op or binary_op 
for every iterator in the range [first1, last1) in order. Assigns through
every iterator i in the range [result, result + (last1 - first1)) a new
corresponding
value equal to op(*(first1 + (i - result)) or binary_op(*(first1 +
(i - result), *(first2 + (i - result))).
</p></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>For Input Iterators an order is already guaranteed, because
only one order is possible.  If a user who passes a Forward
Iterator to one of these algorithms really needs a specific
order of execution, it's possible to achieve that effect by
wrapping it in an Input Iterator adaptor.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="299"></a>299. Incorrect return types for iterator dereference</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.6 [bidirectional.iterators], 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> John Potter <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-22 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In section 24.2.6 [bidirectional.iterators],
Table 75 gives the return type of *r-- as convertible to T.  This is
not consistent with Table 74 which gives the return type of *r++ as
T&amp;.  *r++ = t is valid while *r-- = t is invalid.
</p>

<p>
In section 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators],
Table 76 gives the return type of a[n] as convertible to T.  This is
not consistent with the semantics of *(a + n) which returns T&amp; by
Table 74.  *(a + n) = t is valid while a[n] = t is invalid.
</p>

<p>
Discussion from the Copenhagen meeting: the first part is
uncontroversial.  The second part, operator[] for Random Access
Iterators, requires more thought.  There are reasonable arguments on
both sides.  Return by value from operator[] enables some potentially
useful iterators, e.g. a random access "iota iterator" (a.k.a
"counting iterator" or "int iterator").  There isn't any obvious way
to do this with return-by-reference, since the reference would be to a
temporary.  On the other hand, <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> takes an
arbitrary Random Access Iterator as template argument, and its
operator[] returns by reference.  If we decided that the return type
in Table 76 was correct, we would have to change
<tt>reverse_iterator</tt>.  This change would probably affect user
code.
</p>

<p>
History: the contradiction between <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> and the
Random Access Iterator requirements has been present from an early
stage.  In both the STL proposal adopted by the committee
(N0527==94-0140) and the STL technical report (HPL-95-11 (R.1), by
Stepanov and Lee), the Random Access Iterator requirements say that
operator[]'s return value is "convertible to T".  In N0527
reverse_iterator's operator[] returns by value, but in HPL-95-11
(R.1), and in the STL implementation that HP released to the public,
reverse_iterator's operator[] returns by reference.  In 1995, the
standard was amended to reflect the contents of HPL-95-11 (R.1).  The
original intent for operator[] is unclear.
</p>

<p>
In the long term it may be desirable to add more fine-grained 
iterator requirements, so that access method and traversal strategy
can be decoupled.  (See "Improved Iterator Categories and
Requirements", N1297 = 01-0011, by Jeremy Siek.)  Any decisions
about issue 299 should keep this possibility in mind.
</p>

<p>Further discussion: I propose a compromise between John Potter's
resolution, which requires <tt>T&amp;</tt> as the return type of
<tt>a[n]</tt>, and the current wording, which requires convertible to
<tt>T</tt>. The compromise is to keep the convertible to <tt>T</tt>
for the return type of the expression <tt>a[n]</tt>, but to also add
<tt>a[n] = t</tt> as a valid expression. This compromise "saves" the
common case uses of random access iterators, while at the same time
allowing iterators such as counting iterator and caching file
iterators to remain random access iterators (iterators where the
lifetime of the object returned by <tt>operator*()</tt> is tied to the
lifetime of the iterator).
</p>

<p>
Note that the compromise resolution necessitates a change to
<tt>reverse_iterator</tt>. It would need to use a proxy to support
<tt>a[n] = t</tt>.
</p>

<p>
Note also there is one kind of mutable random access iterator that
will no longer meet the new requirements. Currently, iterators that
return an r-value from <tt>operator[]</tt> meet the requirements for a
mutable random access iterartor, even though the expression <tt>a[n] =
t</tt> will only modify a temporary that goes away. With this proposed
resolution, <tt>a[n] = t</tt> will be required to have the same
operational semantics as <tt>*(a + n) = t</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07-28 Reopened by Alisdair.  No longer solved by concepts.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-09-18 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Why can't we write through the reference returned from operator[] on a
random access iterator?
</p>

<p>
Recommended solution:
</p>

<p>
In table Table 104 -- Random access iterator requirements, replace
</p>

<blockquote>
a[n] : convertible to <del><tt>const T &amp;</tt></del>
<ins><tt>T&amp;</tt> if <tt>X</tt> is mutable, otherwise convertible to <tt>const T&amp;</tt></ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave Open. Alisdair to spearhead a paper on revivification.
</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
In section 24.1.4 [lib.bidirectdional.iterators], change the return
type in table 75 from "convertible to <tt>T</tt>" to
<tt>T&amp;</tt>.
</p>

<p>
In section 24.1.5 [lib.random.access.iterators], change the
operational semantics for <tt>a[n]</tt> to " the r-value of
<tt>a[n]</tt> is equivalent to the r-value of <tt>*(a +
n)</tt>". Add a new row in the table for the expression <tt>a[n] = t</tt>
with a return type of convertible to <tt>T</tt> and operational semantics of
<tt>*(a + n) = t</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[Lillehammer: Real problem, but should be addressed as part of
  iterator redesign]</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/n2758.pdf">N2758</a>.
</blockquote>







<hr>
<h3><a name="302"></a>302. Need error indication from codecvt&lt;&gt;::do_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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Gregory Bumgardner <b>Opened:</b> 2001-01-25 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The effects of <tt>codecvt&lt;&gt;::do_length()</tt> are described in
22.2.1.5.2, paragraph 10.  As implied by that paragraph, and clarified
in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#75">75</a>, <tt>codecvt&lt;&gt;::do_length()</tt> must
process the source data and update the <tt>stateT</tt> argument just
as if the data had been processed by <tt>codecvt&lt;&gt;::in()</tt>.
However, the standard does not specify how <tt>do_length()</tt> would
report a translation failure, should the source sequence contain
untranslatable or illegal character sequences.
</p>

<p>
The other conversion methods return an "error" result value
to indicate that an untranslatable character has been encountered, but
<tt>do_length()</tt> already has a return value (the number of source
characters that have been processed by the method).
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
This issue cannot be resolved without modifying the interface. An exception
cannot be used, as there would be no way to determine how many characters
have been processed and the state object would be left in an indeterminate
state.
</p>

<p>
A source compatible solution involves adding a fifth argument to length()
and do_length() that could be used to return position of the offending
character sequence. This argument would have a default value that would
allow it to be ignored:
</p>

<pre>  int length(stateT&amp; state, 
             const externT* from, 
             const externT* from_end, 
             size_t max,
             const externT** from_next = 0);

  virtual
  int do_length(stateT&amp; state, 
                const externT* from, 
                const externT* from_end, 
                size_t max,
                const externT** from_next);
</pre>

<p>
Then an exception could be used to report any translation errors and
the from_next argument, if used, could then be used to retrieve the
location of the offending character sequence.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The standard is already clear: the return value is the number of
"valid complete characters".  If it encounters an invalid sequence of
external characters, it stops.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="304"></a>304. Must <tt>*a</tt> return an lvalue when <tt>a</tt> is an input iterator?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2001-02-05 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
We all "know" that input iterators are allowed to produce
values when dereferenced of which there is no other in-memory copy.
</p>

<p>
But: Table 72, with a careful reading, seems to imply that this can only be
the case if the value_type has no members (e.g. is a built-in type).
</p>

<p>The problem occurs in the following entry:</p>

<pre>  a-&gt;m     pre: (*a).m is well-defined
           Equivalent to (*a).m
</pre>

<p>
<tt>*a.m</tt> can be well-defined if <tt>*a</tt> is not a reference
type, but since <tt>operator-&gt;()</tt> must return a pointer for
<tt>a-&gt;m</tt> to be well-formed, it needs something to return a
pointer <i>to</i>. This seems to indicate that <tt>*a</tt> must be
buffered somewhere to make a legal input iterator.
</p>

<p>I don't think this was intentional.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The current standard is clear and consistent.  Input iterators that
  return rvalues are in fact implementable.  They may in some cases
  require extra work, but it is still possible to define an operator-&gt;
  in such cases: it doesn't have to return a T*, but may return a
  proxy type.  No change to the standard is justified.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="309"></a>309. Does sentry catch exceptions?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-03-19 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The descriptions of the constructors of basic_istream&lt;&gt;::sentry
(27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry]) and basic_ostream&lt;&gt;::sentry
(27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry]) do not explain what the functions do in
case an exception is thrown while they execute. Some current
implementations allow all exceptions to propagate, others catch them
and set ios_base::badbit instead, still others catch some but let
others propagate.
</p>

<p>
The text also mentions that the functions may call setstate(failbit)
(without actually saying on what object, but presumably the stream
argument is meant).  That may have been fine for
basic_istream&lt;&gt;::sentry prior to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#195">195</a>, since
the function performs an input operation which may fail. However,
issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#195">195</a> amends 27.7.1.1.3 [istream::sentry], p2 to
clarify that the function should actually call setstate(failbit |
eofbit), so the sentence in p3 is redundant or even somewhat
contradictory.
</p>

<p>
The same sentence that appears in 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry], p3
doesn't seem to be very meaningful for basic_istream&lt;&gt;::sentry
which performs no input. It is actually rather misleading since it
would appear to guide library implementers to calling
setstate(failbit) when os.tie()-&gt;flush(), the only called function,
throws an exception (typically, it's badbit that's set in response to
such an event).
</p>

<p><b>Additional comments from Martin, who isn't comfortable with the
    current proposed resolution</b> (see c++std-lib-11530)</p>

<p>
The istream::sentry ctor says nothing about how the function
deals with exemptions (27.6.1.1.2, p1 says that the class is
responsible for doing "exception safe"(*) prefix and suffix
operations but it doesn't explain what level of exception
safety the class promises to provide). The mockup example
of a "typical implementation of the sentry ctor" given in
27.6.1.1.2, p6, removed in ISO/IEC 14882:2003, doesn't show
exception handling, either. Since the ctor is not classified
as a formatted or unformatted input function, the text in
27.6.1.1, p1 through p4 does not apply. All this would seem
to suggest that the sentry ctor should not catch or in any
way handle exceptions thrown from any functions it may call.
Thus, the typical implementation of an istream extractor may
look something like [1].
</p>

<p>
The problem with [1] is that while it correctly sets ios::badbit
if an exception is thrown from one of the functions called from
the sentry ctor, if the sentry ctor reaches EOF while extracting
whitespace from a stream that has eofbit or failbit set in
exceptions(), it will cause an ios::failure to be thrown, which
will in turn cause the extractor to set ios::badbit.
</p>

<p>
The only straightforward way to prevent this behavior is to
move the definition of the sentry object in the extractor
above the try block (as suggested by the example in 22.2.8,
p9 and also indirectly supported by 27.6.1.3, p1). See [2].
But such an implementation will allow exceptions thrown from
functions called from the ctor to freely propagate to the
caller regardless of the setting of ios::badbit in the stream
object's exceptions().
</p>

<p>
So since neither [1] nor [2] behaves as expected, the only
possible solution is to have the sentry ctor catch exceptions
thrown from called functions, set badbit, and propagate those
exceptions if badbit is also set in exceptions(). (Another
solution exists that deals with both kinds of sentries, but
the code is non-obvious and cumbersome -- see [3].)
</p>

<p>
Please note that, as the issue points out, current libraries
do not behave consistently, suggesting  that implementors are
not quite clear on the exception handling in istream::sentry,
despite the fact that some LWG members might feel otherwise.
(As documented by the parenthetical comment here:
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2003/n1480.html#309)
</p>

<p>
Also please note that those LWG members who in Copenhagen
felt that "a sentry's constructor should not catch exceptions,
because sentries should only be used within (un)formatted input
functions and that exception handling is the responsibility of
those functions, not of the sentries," as noted here
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2001/n1310.html#309
would in effect be either arguing for the behavior described
in [1] or for extractors implemented along the lines of [3].
</p>

<p>
The original proposed resolution (Revision 25 of the issues
list) clarifies the role of the sentry ctor WRT exception
handling by making it clear that extractors (both library
or user-defined) should be implemented along the lines of
[2] (as opposed to [1]) and that no exception thrown from
the callees should propagate out of either function unless
badbit is also set in exceptions().
</p>


<p>[1] Extractor that catches exceptions thrown from sentry:</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>struct S { long i; };

istream&amp; operator&gt;&gt; (istream &amp;strm, S &amp;s)
{
    ios::iostate err = ios::goodbit;
    try {
        const istream::sentry guard (strm, false);
        if (guard) {
            use_facet&lt;num_get&lt;char&gt; &gt;(strm.getloc ())
                .get (istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt;(strm),
                      istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt;(),
                      strm, err, s.i);
        }
    }
    catch (...) {
        bool rethrow;
        try {
            strm.setstate (ios::badbit);
            rethrow = false;
        }
        catch (...) {
            rethrow = true;
        }
        if (rethrow)
            throw;
    }
    if (err)
        strm.setstate (err);
    return strm;
}
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>[2] Extractor that propagates exceptions thrown from sentry:</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>istream&amp; operator&gt;&gt; (istream &amp;strm, S &amp;s)
{
    istream::sentry guard (strm, false);
    if (guard) {
        ios::iostate err = ios::goodbit;
        try {
            use_facet&lt;num_get&lt;char&gt; &gt;(strm.getloc ())
                .get (istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt;(strm),
                      istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt;(),
                      strm, err, s.i);
        }
        catch (...) {
            bool rethrow;
            try {
                strm.setstate (ios::badbit);
                rethrow = false;
            }
            catch (...) {
                rethrow = true;
            }
            if (rethrow)
                throw;
        }
        if (err)
            strm.setstate (err);
    }
    return strm;
}
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
[3] Extractor that catches exceptions thrown from sentry
but doesn't set badbit if the exception was thrown as a
result of a call to strm.clear().
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>istream&amp; operator&gt;&gt; (istream &amp;strm, S &amp;s)
{
    const ios::iostate state = strm.rdstate ();
    const ios::iostate except = strm.exceptions ();
    ios::iostate err = std::ios::goodbit;
    bool thrown = true;
    try {
        const istream::sentry guard (strm, false);
        thrown = false;
        if (guard) {
            use_facet&lt;num_get&lt;char&gt; &gt;(strm.getloc ())
                .get (istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt;(strm),
                      istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt;(),
                      strm, err, s.i);
        }
    }
    catch (...) {
        if (thrown &amp;&amp; state &amp; except)
            throw;
        try {
            strm.setstate (ios::badbit);
            thrown = false;
        }
        catch (...) {
            thrown = true;
        }
        if (thrown)
            throw;
    }
    if (err)
        strm.setstate (err);

    return strm;
}
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
[Pre-Berlin] Reopened at the request of Paolo Carlini and Steve Clamage.
</p>

<p>
[Pre-Portland] A relevant newsgroup post:
</p>

<p>
The current proposed resolution of issue #309
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#309)  is
unacceptable.   I write commerical software and coding around this
makes my code ugly, non-intuitive, and requires comments referring
people to this very issue.   Following is the full explanation of my
experience.
</p>
<p>
In the course of writing software for commercial use, I constructed
std::ifstream's based on user-supplied pathnames on typical POSIX
systems.
</p>
<p>
It was expected that some files that opened successfully might not read
successfully -- such as a pathname which actually refered to a
directory.   Intuitively, I expected the streambuffer underflow() code
to throw an exception in this situation, and recent implementations of
libstdc++'s basic_filebuf do just that (as well as many of my own
custom streambufs).
</p>
<p>
I also intuitively expected that the istream code would convert these
exceptions to the "badbit' set on the stream object, because I had not
requested exceptions.    I refer to 27.6.1.1. P4.
</p>
<p>
However, this was not the case on at least two implementations -- if
the first thing I did with an istream was call operator&gt;&gt;( T&amp; ) for T
among the basic arithmetic types and std::string.   Looking further I
found that the sentry's constructor was invoking the exception when it
pre-scanned for whitespace, and the extractor function (operator&gt;&gt;())
was not catching exceptions in this situation.
</p>
<p>
So, I was in a situation where setting 'noskipws' would change the
istream's behavior even though no characters (whitespace or not) could
ever be successfully read.
</p>
<p>
Also, calling .peek() on the istream before calling the extractor()
changed the behavior (.peek() had the effect of setting the badbit
ahead of time).
</p>
<p>
I found this all to be so inconsistent and inconvenient for me and my
code design, that I filed a bugzilla entry for libstdc++.   I was then
told that the bug cannot be fixed until issue #309 is resolved by the
committee.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Moved to NAD.
</p>
<p>
See the rationale in the issue. Paolo, who requested that the issue be
reopened, agreed with the rationale.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG agrees there is minor variation between implementations,
  but believes that it doesn't matter. This is a rarely used corner
  case. There is no evidence that this has any commercial importance
  or that it causes actual portability problems for customers trying
  to write code that runs on multiple implementations.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="313"></a>313. set_terminate and set_unexpected question</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.3.3 [terminate] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Judy Ward <b>Opened:</b> 2001-04-03 <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#terminate">issues</a> in [terminate].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to section 18.7.3.3 of the standard, std::terminate() is
supposed to call the terminate_handler in effect immediately after
evaluating the throw expression.
</p>

<p>
Question: what if the terminate_handler in effect is itself
std::terminate?
</p>

<p>For example:</p>

<pre>  #include &lt;exception&gt;

  int main () {
      std::set_terminate(std::terminate);
      throw 5;
      return 0;
  }
</pre>

<p>
Is the implementation allowed to go into an infinite loop?
</p>

<p>
I think the same issue applies to std::set_unexpected.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Infinite recursion is to be expected: users who set the terminate
handler to <tt>terminate</tt> are explicitly asking for <tt>terminate</tt>
to call itself.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="314"></a>314. Is the stack unwound when terminate() is called?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.8.3.3 [terminate] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Detlef Vollmann <b>Opened:</b> 2001-04-11 <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#terminate">issues</a> in [terminate].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The standard appears to contradict itself about whether the stack is
unwound when the implementation calls terminate().
</p>

<p>From 18.7.3.3p2:</p>
<blockquote><p>
    Calls the terminate_handler function in effect immediately
    after evaluating the throw-expression (lib.terminate.handler),
    if called by the implementation [...]
</p></blockquote>

<p>So the stack is guaranteed not to be unwound.</p>

<p>But from 15.3p9:</p>
<blockquote><p>
    [...]whether or not the stack is unwound before this call
    to terminate() is implementation-defined (except.terminate).
</p></blockquote>

<p>
And 15.5.1 actually defines that in most cases the stack is unwound.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>There is definitely no contradiction between the core and library
clauses; nothing in the core clauses says that stack unwinding happens
after <tt>terminate</tt> is called.  18.7.3.3p2 does not say anything
about when terminate() is called; it merely specifies which
<tt>terminate_handler</tt> is used.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="323"></a>323. abs() overloads in different headers</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2001-06-04 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Currently the standard mandates the following overloads of
abs():</p>

<pre>    abs(long), abs(int) in &lt;cstdlib&gt;

    abs(float), abs(double), abs(long double) in &lt;cmath&gt;

    template&lt;class T&gt; T abs(const complex&lt;T&gt;&amp;) in &lt;complex&gt;

    template&lt;class T&gt; valarray&lt;T&gt; abs(const valarray&lt;T&gt;&amp;); in &lt;valarray&gt;
</pre>

<p>
The problem is that having only some overloads visible of a function
that works on "implicitly inter-convertible" types is dangerous in
practice. The headers that get included at any point in a translation
unit can change unpredictably during program
development/maintenance. The wrong overload might be unintentionally
selected.
</p>

<p>
Currently, there is nothing that mandates the simultaneous visibility
of these overloads. Indeed, some vendors have begun fastidiously
reducing dependencies among their (public) headers as a QOI issue: it
helps people to write portable code by refusing to compile unless all
the correct headers are #included.
</p>

<p>The same issue may exist for other functions in the library.</p>

<p>Redmond: PJP reports that C99 adds two new kinds of abs: complex,
and int_max_abs.</p>

<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#343">343</a>.</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The situation is not sufficiently severe to warrant a change.
</blockquote>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The programs that could potentially be broken by this situation are
  already fragile, and somewhat contrived: For example, a user-defined
  class that has conversion overloads both to <tt>long</tt> and
  to <tt>float</tt>.  If <tt>x</tt> is a value of such a class, then
  <tt>abs(x)</tt> would give the <tt>long</tt> version if the user
  included &lt;cstdlib&gt;, the <tt>float</tt> version if the user
  included &lt;cmath&gt;, and would be diagnosed as ambiguous at
  compile time if the user included both headers.  The LWG couldn't
  find an example of a program whose meaning would be changed (as
  opposed to changing it from well-formed to ill-formed) simply by
  adding another standard header.</p>

<p>Since the harm seems minimal, and there don't seem to be any simple
  and noninvasive solutions, this is being closed as NAD.  It is
  marked as "Future" for two reasons.  First, it might be useful to
  define an <tt>&lt;all&gt;</tt> header that would include all
  Standard Library headers.  Second, we should at least make sure that
  future library extensions don't make this problem worse.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="326"></a>326. Missing typedef in moneypunct_byname</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.4 [locale.moneypunct.byname] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-07-05 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The definition of the moneypunct facet contains the typedefs char_type
and string_type. Only one of these names, string_type, is defined in
the derived facet, moneypunct_byname.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>For consistency with the numpunct facet, add a typedef for
char_type to the definition of the moneypunct_byname facet in
22.4.6.4 [locale.moneypunct.byname].</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The absence of the typedef is irrelevant.  Users can still access
the typedef, because it is inherited from the base class.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="330"></a>330. Misleading "exposition only" value in class locale definition</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-07-15 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The "exposition only" value of the std::locale::none constant shown in
the definition of class locale is misleading in that it on many
systems conflicts with the value assigned to one if the LC_XXX
constants (specifically, LC_COLLATE on AIX, LC_ALL on HP-UX, LC_CTYPE
on Linux and SunOS). This causes incorrect behavior when such a
constant is passed to one of the locale member functions that accept a
locale::category argument and interpret it as either the C LC_XXX
constant or a bitmap of locale::category values. At least three major
implementations adopt the suggested value without a change and
consequently suffer from this problem.
</p>

<p>
For instance, the following code will (presumably) incorrectly copy facets
belonging to the collate category from the German locale on AIX:
</p>

<pre>  std::locale l (std::locale ("C"), "de_DE", std::locale::none);
</pre>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG agrees that it may be difficult to implement locale member
functions in such a way that they can take either <tt>category</tt>
arguments or the LC_ constants defined in &lt;cctype&gt;.  In light of
this requirement (22.3.1.1.1 [locale.category], paragraph 2), and in light
of the requirement in the preceding paragraph that it is possible to
combine <tt>category</tt> bitmask elements with bitwise operations,
defining the <tt>category</tt> elements is delicate,
particularly if an implementor is constrained to work with a
preexisting C library.  (Just using the existing LC_ constants would
not work in general.)  There's no set of "exposition only" values that
could give library implementors proper guidance in such a delicate
matter.  The non-normative example we're giving is no worse than
any other choice would be.</p>

<p>See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#347">347</a>.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="332"></a>332. Consider adding increment and decrement operators to std::fpos&lt; T &gt; </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#NAD">NAD</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 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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Increment and decrement operators are missing from 
Table 88 -- Position type requirements in 27.5.3 [fpos].
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Table 88 (section 27.4.3) -- Position type requirements
be updated to include increment and decrement operators.
</p>

<pre>expression        return type     operational    note

++p               fpos&amp;           p += O(1)
p++               fpos            { P tmp = p;
                                    ++p;
                                    return tmp; }
--p               fpos&amp;           p -= O(1)
p--               fpos            { P tmp = p;
                                    --p;
                                    return tmp; }
</pre>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes this is a request for extension, not a defect
report.  Additionally, nobody saw a clear need for this extension;
<tt>fpos</tt> is used only in very limited ways.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="342"></a>342. seek and eofbit</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-09 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>I think we have a defect.</p>

<p>According to lwg issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#60">60</a> which is now a dr, the
description of seekg in 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] paragraph 38 now looks
like:</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 
gcount(). After constructing a sentry object, if fail() != true, 
executes rdbuf()-&gt;pubseekpos( pos).
</p></blockquote>

<p>And according to lwg issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#243">243</a> which is also now a dr,
27.6.1.3, paragraph 1 looks like:</p>

<blockquote><p>
Each unformatted input function begins execution by constructing an 
object of class sentry with the default argument noskipws (second) 
argument true. If the sentry object returns true, when converted to a 
value of type bool, the function endeavors to obtain the requested 
input.  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. If an exception is thrown during 
input then ios::badbit is turned on in *this'ss error state. If 
(exception()&amp;badbit)!= 0 then the exception is rethrown. It also counts 
the number of characters extracted. If no exception has been thrown it 
ends by storing the count in a member object and returning the value 
specified. In any event the sentry object is destroyed before leaving 
the unformatted input function.
</p></blockquote>

<p>And finally 27.6.1.1.2/5 says this about sentry:</p>

<blockquote><p>
If, after any preparation is completed, is.good() is true, ok_ != false 
otherwise, ok_ == false.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
So although the seekg paragraph says that the operation proceeds if 
!fail(), the behavior of unformatted functions says the operation 
proceeds only if good().  The two statements are contradictory when only 
eofbit is set.  I don't think the current text is clear which condition 
should be respected.
</p>

<p><b>Further discussion from Redmond:</b></p>

<p>PJP: It doesn't seem quite right to say that <tt>seekg</tt> is
"unformatted". That makes specific claims about sentry that
aren't quite appropriate for seeking, which has less fragile failure
modes than actual input.  If we do really mean that it's unformatted
input, it should behave the same way as other unformatted input.  On
the other hand, "principle of least surprise" is that seeking from EOF
ought to be OK.</p>

<p>
Pre-Berlin:  Paolo points out several problems with the proposed resolution in
Ready state:
</p>

<ul>
<li>It should apply to both overloads of seekg.</li>
<li>tellg has similar issues, except that it should not call clear().</li>
<li>The point about clear() seems to apply to seekp().</li>
<li>Depending on the outcome of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#419">419</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.</li>
</ul>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Moved to NAD. Will reopen if proposed resolution is supplied.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>Change 27.7.1.3 [istream.unformatted] to:</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, does not affect the value returned by subsequent calls to
gcount(), and does not examine the value returned by the sentry
object. After constructing a sentry object, if <tt>fail() !=
true</tt>, executes <tt>rdbuf()-&gt;pubseekpos(pos)</tt>.  In
case of success, the function calls clear().
In case of failure, the function calls <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt>
(which may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt>).
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[Lillehammer: Matt provided wording.]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>In C, fseek does clear EOF.  This is probably what most users would
  expect.  We agree that having eofbit set should not deter a seek,
  and that a successful seek should clear eofbit. Note
  that <tt>fail()</tt> is true only if <tt>failbit</tt>
  or <tt>badbit</tt> is set, so using <tt>!fail()</tt>, rather
  than <tt>good()</tt>, satisfies this goal.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="343"></a>343. Unspecified library header dependencies</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-09 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The synopses of the C++ library headers clearly show which names are
required to be defined in each header. Since in order to implement the
classes and templates defined in these headers declarations of other
templates (but not necessarily their definitions) are typically
necessary the standard in 17.4.4, p1 permits library implementers to
include any headers needed to implement the definitions in each header.
</p>

<p>
For instance, although it is not explicitly specified in the synopsis of
&lt;string&gt;, at the point of definition of the std::basic_string template
the declaration of the std::allocator template must be in scope. All
current implementations simply include &lt;memory&gt; from within &lt;string&gt;,
either directly or indirectly, to bring the declaration of
std::allocator into scope.
</p>

<p>
Additionally, however, some implementation also include &lt;istream&gt; and
&lt;ostream&gt; at the top of &lt;string&gt; to bring the declarations of
std::basic_istream and std::basic_ostream into scope (which are needed
in order to implement the string inserter and extractor operators
(21.3.7.9 [lib.string.io])). Other implementations only include
&lt;iosfwd&gt;, since strictly speaking, only the declarations and not the
full definitions are necessary.
</p>

<p>
Obviously, it is possible to implement &lt;string&gt; without actually
providing the full definitions of all the templates std::basic_string
uses (std::allocator, std::basic_istream, and std::basic_ostream).
Furthermore, not only is it possible, doing so is likely to have a
positive effect on compile-time efficiency.
</p>

<p>
But while it may seem perfectly reasonable to expect a program that uses
the std::basic_string insertion and extraction operators to also
explicitly include &lt;istream&gt; or &lt;ostream&gt;, respectively, it doesn't seem
reasonable to also expect it to explicitly include &lt;memory&gt;. Since
what's reasonable and what isn't is highly subjective one would expect
the standard to specify what can and what cannot be assumed.
Unfortunately, that isn't the case.
</p>

<p>The examples below demonstrate the issue.</p>

<p>Example 1:</p>

<p>It is not clear whether the following program is complete:</p>

<pre>#include &lt;string&gt;

extern std::basic_ostream&lt;char&gt; &amp;strm;

int main () {
    strm &lt;&lt; std::string ("Hello, World!\n");
}
</pre>    

<p>or whether one must explicitly include &lt;memory&gt; or
&lt;ostream&gt; (or both) in addition to &lt;string&gt; in order for
the program to compile.</p>


<p>Example 2:</p>

<p>Similarly, it is unclear whether the following program is complete:</p>

<pre>#include &lt;istream&gt;

extern std::basic_iostream&lt;char&gt; &amp;strm;

int main () {
    strm &lt;&lt; "Hello, World!\n";
}
</pre>

<p>
or whether one needs to explicitly include &lt;ostream&gt;, and
perhaps even other headers containing the definitions of other
required templates:</p>

<pre>#include &lt;ios&gt;
#include &lt;istream&gt;
#include &lt;ostream&gt;
#include &lt;streambuf&gt;

extern std::basic_iostream&lt;char&gt; &amp;strm;

int main () {
    strm &lt;&lt; "Hello, World!\n";
}
</pre>

<p>Example 3:</p>

<p>Likewise, it seems unclear whether the program below is complete:</p>
<pre>#include &lt;iterator&gt;

bool foo (std::istream_iterator&lt;int&gt; a, std::istream_iterator&lt;int&gt; b)
{
    return a == b;
}

int main () { }
</pre>

<p>or whether one should be required to include &lt;istream&gt;.</p>

<p>There are many more examples that demonstrate this lack of a
requirement.  I believe that in a good number of cases it would be
unreasonable to require that a program explicitly include all the
headers necessary for a particular template to be specialized, but I
think that there are cases such as some of those above where it would
be desirable to allow implementations to include only as much as
necessary and not more.</p>

<p><i>[
post Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Position taken in prior reviews is that the idea of a table of header
dependencies is a good one. Our view is that a full paper is needed to
do justice to this, and we've made that recommendation to the issue
author.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD. Handled by LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1178">1178</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
For every C++ library header, supply a minimum set of other C++ library
headers that are required to be included by that header. The proposed
list is below (C++ headers for C Library Facilities, table 12 in
17.4.1.2, p3, are omitted):
</p>

<pre>+------------+--------------------+
| C++ header |required to include |
+============+====================+
|&lt;algorithm&gt; |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;bitset&gt;    |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;complex&gt;   |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;deque&gt;     |&lt;memory&gt;            |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;exception&gt; |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;fstream&gt;   |&lt;ios&gt;               |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;functional&gt;|                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;iomanip&gt;   |&lt;ios&gt;               |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;ios&gt;       |&lt;streambuf&gt;         |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;iosfwd&gt;    |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;iostream&gt;  |&lt;istream&gt;, &lt;ostream&gt;|
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;istream&gt;   |&lt;ios&gt;               |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;iterator&gt;  |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;limits&gt;    |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;list&gt;      |&lt;memory&gt;            |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;locale&gt;    |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;map&gt;       |&lt;memory&gt;            |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;memory&gt;    |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;new&gt;       |&lt;exception&gt;         |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;numeric&gt;   |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;ostream&gt;   |&lt;ios&gt;               |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;queue&gt;     |&lt;deque&gt;             |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;set&gt;       |&lt;memory&gt;            |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;sstream&gt;   |&lt;ios&gt;, &lt;string&gt;     |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;stack&gt;     |&lt;deque&gt;             |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;stdexcept&gt; |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;streambuf&gt; |&lt;ios&gt;               |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;string&gt;    |&lt;memory&gt;            |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;strstream&gt; |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;typeinfo&gt;  |&lt;exception&gt;         |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;utility&gt;   |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;valarray&gt;  |                    |
+------------+--------------------+
|&lt;vector&gt;    |&lt;memory&gt;            |
+------------+--------------------+
</pre>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The portability problem is real.  A program that works correctly on
one implementation might fail on another, because of different header
dependencies.  This problem was understood before the standard was
completed, and it was a conscious design choice.</p>
<p>One possible way to deal with this, as a library extension, would
be an &lt;all&gt; header.</p>

<p>
Hinnant:  It's time we dealt with this issue for C++0X.  Reopened.
</p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="344"></a>344. grouping + showbase</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2 [category.numeric] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-13 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
When both grouping and showbase are active and the basefield is octal, 
does the leading 0 participate in the grouping or not?  For example, 
should one format as: 0,123,456 or 0123,456?
</p>
<p>
An analogy can be drawn with hexadecimal.  It appears that 0x123,456 is 
preferred over 0x,123,456.  However, this analogy is not universally 
accepted to apply to the octal base.  The standard is not clear on how 
to format (or parse) in this manner.
</p>

<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Insert into 22.4.3.1.2 [facet.numpunct.virtuals] paragraph 3, just before the last
sentence:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The leading hexadecimal base specifier "0x" does not participate in 
grouping.  The leading '0' octal base specifier may participate in 
grouping.  It is unspecified if the leading '0' participates in 
formatting octal numbers.  In parsing octal numbers, the implementation 
is encouraged to accept both the leading '0' participating in the 
grouping, and not participating (e.g. 0123,456 or 0,123,456).
</p></blockquote>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The current behavior may be unspecified, but it's not clear that it
matters.  This is an obscure corner case, since grouping is usually
intended for the benefit of humans and oct/hex prefixes are usually
intended for the benefit of machines.  There is not a strong enough
consensus in the LWG for action.
</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="348"></a>348. Minor issue with std::pair operator&lt;</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Sawyer <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#532">532</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>


<p>
The current wording of 20.2.2 [lib.pairs] p6 precludes the use of
operator&lt; on any pair type which contains a pointer.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>In 20.3.5 [pairs] paragraph 6, replace:</p>
<pre>    Returns: x.first &lt; y.first || (!(y.first &lt; x.first) &amp;&amp; x.second &lt;
        y.second).
</pre>
<p>With:</p>
<pre>    Returns: std::less&lt;T1&gt;()( x.first, y.first ) ||
             (!std::less&lt;T1&gt;()( y.first, x.first) &amp;&amp; 
             std::less&lt;T2&gt;()( x.second, y.second ) )
</pre>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is an instance of a much more general problem.  If we want
  operator&lt; to translate to std::less for pairs of pointers, where
  do we draw the line?  The same issue applies to individual
  pointers, smart pointer wrappers, std::vector&lt;T*&gt;, and so
  on.</p>

<p>Andy Koenig suggests that the real issue here is that we aren't
  distinguishing adequately between two different orderings, a
  "useful ordering" and a "canonical ordering" that's used just
  because we sometimes need <i>some</i> ordering without caring much
  which ordering it is.  Another example of the later is typeinfo's
  <tt>before</tt>.</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="350"></a>350. allocator&lt;&gt;::address</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.5.1 [allocator.members], 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements], 17.6.1.1 [contents] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nathan Myers <b>Opened:</b> 2001-10-25 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#634">634</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>See c++std-lib-9006 and c++std-lib-9007.  This issue is taken
verbatim from -9007.</p>

<p>
The core language feature allowing definition of operator&amp;() applied 
to any non-builtin type makes that operator often unsafe to use in 
implementing libraries, including the Standard Library.  The result
is that many library facilities fail for legal user code, such as
the fragment</p>
<pre>  class A { private: A* operator&amp;(); };
  std::vector&lt;A&gt; aa;

  class B { };
  B* operator&amp;(B&amp;) { return 0; }
  std::vector&lt;B&gt; ba;
</pre>

<p>
In particular, the requirements table for Allocator (Table 32) specifies
no semantics at all for member address(), and allocator&lt;&gt;::address is 
defined in terms of unadorned operator &amp;.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.6.1.1, Change the definition of allocator&lt;&gt;::address from:</p>
<blockquote><p>
  Returns: &amp;x
</p></blockquote>

<p>to:</p>

<p>
  Returns: The value that the built in operator&amp;(x) would return if not 
  overloaded.
</p>

<p>
In 20.1.6, Table 32, add to the Notes column of the a.address(r) and
a.address(s) lines, respectively: 
</p>

<pre>  allocator&lt;T&gt;::address(r)
  allocator&lt;T&gt;::address(s)
</pre> 

<p>In addition, in clause 17.4.1.1, add a statement:</p>

<blockquote><p>
 The Standard Library does not apply operator&amp; to any type for which
 operator&amp; may be overloaded.
</p></blockquote> 



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes both examples are ill-formed.  The contained type
is required to be CopyConstructible (20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements]), and that
includes the requirement that &amp;t return the usual types and
values. Since allocators are intended to be used in conjunction with
containers, and since the CopyConstructible requirements appear to
have been written to deal with the concerns of this issue, the LWG
feels it is NAD unless someone can come up with a well-formed example
exhibiting a problem.</p>

<p>It may well be that the CopyConstructible requirements are too
  restrictive and that either the container requirements or the
  CopyConstructive requirements should be relaxed, but that's a far
  larger issue.  Marking this issue as "future" as a pointer to that
  larger issue.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="351"></a>351. unary_negate and binary_negate: struct or class?</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dale Riley <b>Opened:</b> 2001-11-12 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.8 [function.objects] the header &lt;functional&gt; synopsis declares
the unary_negate and binary_negate function objects as struct.
However in 20.8.9 [negators] the unary_negate and binary_negate
function objects are defined as class.  Given the context, they are
not "basic function objects" like negate, so this is either a typo or
an editorial oversight.
</p>

<p><i>[Taken from comp.std.c++]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Change the synopsis to reflect the useage in 20.8.9 [negators]</p>

<p><i>[Cura�ao: Since the language permits "struct", the LWG
views this as NAD. They suggest, however, that the Project Editor
might wish to make the change as editorial.]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="356"></a>356. Meaning of ctype_base::mask enumerators</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.1 [category.ctype] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>What should the following program print?</p>

<pre>  #include &lt;locale&gt;
  #include &lt;iostream&gt;

  class my_ctype : public std::ctype&lt;char&gt;
  {
    typedef std::ctype&lt;char&gt; base;
  public:
    my_ctype(std::size_t refs = 0) : base(my_table, false, refs)
    {
      std::copy(base::classic_table(), base::classic_table() + base::table_size,
                my_table);
      my_table[(unsigned char) '_'] = (base::mask) (base::print | base::space);
    }
  private:
    mask my_table[base::table_size];
  };

  int main()
  {
    my_ctype ct;
    std::cout &lt;&lt; "isspace: " &lt;&lt; ct.is(std::ctype_base::space, '_') &lt;&lt; "    "
              &lt;&lt; "isalpha: " &lt;&lt; ct.is(std::ctype_base::alpha, '_') &lt;&lt; std::endl;
  }
</pre>

<p>The goal is to create a facet where '_' is treated as whitespace.</p>

<p>On gcc 3.0, this program prints "isspace: 1 isalpha: 0".  On
Microsoft C++ it prints "isspace: 1 isalpha: 1".</p>

<p>
I believe that both implementations are legal, and the standard does not
give enough guidance for users to be able to use std::ctype's
protected interface portably.</p>

<p>
The above program assumes that ctype_base::mask enumerators like
<tt>space</tt> and <tt>print</tt> are disjoint, and that the way to
say that a character is both a space and a printing character is to or
those two enumerators together.  This is suggested by the "exposition
only" values in 22.4.1 [category.ctype], but it is nowhere specified in
normative text.  An alternative interpretation is that the more
specific categories subsume the less specific.  The above program
gives the results it does on the Microsoft compiler because, on that
compiler, <tt>print</tt> has all the bits set for each specific
printing character class.
</p>

<p>From the point of view of std::ctype's public interface, there's no
important difference between these two techniques.  From the point of
view of the protected interface, there is.  If I'm defining a facet
that inherits from std::ctype&lt;char&gt;, I'm the one who defines the
value that table()['a'] returns.  I need to know what combination of
mask values I should use.  This isn't so very esoteric: it's exactly
why std::ctype has a protected interface.  If we care about users
being able to write their own ctype facets, we have to give them a
portable way to do it.
</p>

<p>
Related reflector messages:
lib-9224, lib-9226, lib-9229, lib-9270, lib-9272, lib-9273, lib-9274,
lib-9277, lib-9279.
</p>

<p>Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#339">339</a> is related, but not identical.  The
proposed resolution if issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#339">339</a> says that
ctype_base::mask must be a bitmask type. It does not say that the
ctype_base::mask elements are bitmask elements, so it doesn't
directly affect this issue.</p>

<p>More comments from Benjamin Kosnik, who believes that 
that C99 compatibility essentially requires what we're
calling option 1 below.</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>I think the C99 standard is clear, that isspace -&gt; !isalpha.
--------

#include &lt;locale&gt;
#include &lt;iostream&gt;

class my_ctype : public std::ctype&lt;char&gt;
{
private:
  typedef std::ctype&lt;char&gt; base;
  mask my_table[base::table_size];

public:
  my_ctype(std::size_t refs = 0) : base(my_table, false, refs)
  {
    std::copy(base::classic_table(), base::classic_table() + base::table_size,
              my_table);
    mask both = base::print | base::space;
    my_table[static_cast&lt;mask&gt;('_')] = both;
  }
};

int main()
{
  using namespace std;
  my_ctype ct;
  cout &lt;&lt; "isspace: " &lt;&lt; ct.is(ctype_base::space, '_') &lt;&lt; endl;
  cout &lt;&lt; "isprint: " &lt;&lt; ct.is(ctype_base::print, '_') &lt;&lt; endl;

  // ISO C99, isalpha iff upper | lower set, and !space.
  // 7.5, p 193
  // -&gt; looks like g++ behavior is correct.
  // 356 -&gt; bitmask elements are required for ctype_base
  // 339 -&gt; bitmask type required for mask
  cout &lt;&lt; "isalpha: " &lt;&lt; ct.is(ctype_base::alpha, '_') &lt;&lt; endl;
}
</pre>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Informally, we have three choices:</p> 
<ol>
<li>Require that the enumerators are disjoint (except for alnum and
graph)</li>
<li>Require that the enumerators are not disjoint, and specify which
of them subsume which others.  (e.g. mandate that lower includes alpha
and print)</li>
<li>Explicitly leave this unspecified, which the result that the above
program is not portable.</li>
</ol>

<p>Either of the first two options is just as good from the standpoint
of portability.  Either one will require some implementations to
change.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG agrees that this is a real ambiguity, and that both
interpretations are conforming under the existing standard. However,
there's no evidence that it's causing problems for real users. Users
who want to define ctype facets portably can test the ctype_base masks
to see which interpretation is being used.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="357"></a>357. &lt;cmath&gt; float functions cannot return HUGE_VAL</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-02-26 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The float versions of the math functions have no meaningful value to return 
for a range error. The long double versions have a value they can return, 
but it isn't necessarily the most reasonable value.
</p>

<p>
Section 26.5 [lib.c.math], paragraph 5, says that C++ "adds float and long 
double overloaded versions of these functions, with the same semantics," 
referring to the math functions from the C90 standard.
</p>

<p>
The C90 standard, in section 7.5.1, paragraph 3, says that functions return 
"the value of the macro HUGE_VAL" when they encounter a range error. 
Section 7.5, paragraph 2, defines HUGE_VAL as a macro that "expands to a 
positive double expression, not necessarily representable as a float."
</p>

<p>
Therefore, the float versions of the math functions have no way to
signal a range error. <i>[Cura�ao: The LWG notes that this isn't
strictly correct, since errno is set.]</i> The semantics require that they
return HUGE_VAL, but they cannot because HUGE_VAL might not be
representable as a float.
</p>

<p>
The problem with long double functions is less severe because HUGE_VAL is 
representable as a long double. On the other hand, it might not be a "huge" 
long double value, and might fall well within the range of normal return 
values for a long double function. Therefore, it does not make sense for a 
long double function to return a double (HUGE_VAL) for a range error.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Cura�ao: C99 was faced with a similar problem, which they fixed by
adding HUGE_VALF and HUGE_VALL in addition to HUGE_VAL.</p>

<p>C++ must also fix, but it should be done in the context of the
general C99 based changes to C++, not via DR. Thus the LWG in Cura�ao
felt the resolution should be NAD, FUTURE, but the issue is being held
open for one more meeting to ensure LWG members not present during the
discussion concur.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Will be fixed as part of more general work in the TR.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="361"></a>361. num_get&lt;&gt;::do_get (..., void*&amp;) checks grouping</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
22.2.2.2.2, p12 specifies that <tt>thousands_sep</tt> is to be inserted only
for integral types (issue 282 suggests that this should be done for
all arithmetic types).
</p>

<p>
22.2.2.1.2, p12 requires that grouping be checked for all extractors
including that for <tt>void*</tt>.
</p>

<p>
I don't think that's right. <tt>void*</tt> values should not be checked for
grouping, should they? (Although if they should, then <tt>num_put</tt> needs
to write them out, otherwise their extraction will fail.)
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the first sentence of 22.2.2.2.2, p12 from
</p>
<blockquote><p>
    Digit grouping is checked. That is, the positions of discarded
    separators is examined for consistency with
    use_facet&lt;numpunct&lt;charT&gt; &gt;(loc).grouping().
    If they are not consistent then ios_base::failbit is assigned
    to err.
</p></blockquote>

<p>to</p>
<blockquote><p>
    Except for conversions to void*, digit grouping is checked...
</p></blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This would be a change: as it stands, the standard clearly
  specifies that grouping applies to void*.  A survey of existing
  practice shows that most existing implementations do that, as they
  should.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="366"></a>366. Excessive const-qualification</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The following member functions are declared const, yet return non-const
pointers. We believe they are should be changed, because they allow code
that may surprise the user. See document N1360 for details and
rationale.
</p>

<p><i>[Santa Cruz: the real issue is that we've got const member
functions that return pointers to non-const, and N1360 proposes
replacing them by overloaded pairs.  There isn't a consensus about
whether this is a real issue, since we've never said what our
constness policy is for iostreams.  N1360 relies on a distinction
between physical constness and logical constness; that distinction, or
those terms, does not appear in the standard.]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>In 27.4.4 and 27.4.4.2</p>
<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  basic_ostream&lt;charT,traits&gt;* tie() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  basic_ostream&lt;charT,traits&gt;* tie();
  const basic_ostream&lt;charT,traits&gt;* tie() const;
</pre>

<p>and replace</p>
<pre>  basic_streambuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* rdbuf() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  basic_streambuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* rdbuf();
  const basic_streambuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* rdbuf() const;
</pre>

<p>In 27.5.2 and 27.5.2.3.1</p>
<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  char_type* eback() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  char_type* eback();
  const char_type* eback() const;
</pre>

<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  char_type gptr() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  char_type* gptr();
  const char_type* gptr() const;
</pre>

<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  char_type* egptr() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  char_type* egptr();
  const char_type* egptr() const;
</pre>

<p>In 27.5.2 and 27.5.2.3.2</p>
<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  char_type* pbase() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  char_type* pbase();
  const char_type* pbase() const;
</pre>

<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  char_type* pptr() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  char_type* pptr();
  const char_type* pptr() const;
</pre>

<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  char_type* epptr() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  char_type* epptr();
  const char_type* epptr() const;
</pre>

<p>In 27.7.2, 27.7.2.2, 27.7.3 27.7.3.2, 27.7.4, and 27.7.6</p>
<p>Replace</p>
<pre>  basic_stringbuf&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;* rdbuf() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  basic_stringbuf&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;* rdbuf();
  const basic_stringbuf&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;* rdbuf() const;
</pre>

<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>  basic_filebuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* rdbuf() const;
</pre>
<p>with</p>
<pre>  basic_filebuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* rdbuf();
  const basic_filebuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* rdbuf() const;
</pre>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The existing specification is a bit sloppy, but there's no
  particular reason to change this other than tidiness, and there are
  a number of ways in which streams might have been designed
  differently if we were starting today.  There's no evidence that the
  existing constness policy is harming users.  We might consider
  a different constness policy as part of a full stream redesign.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="367"></a>367. remove_copy/remove_copy_if and Input Iterators</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2002-05-13 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
remove_copy and remove_copy_if (25.3.8 [alg.remove]) permit their
input range to be marked with Input Iterators. However, since two
operations are required against the elements to copy (comparison and
assigment), when the input range uses Input Iterators, a temporary
copy must be taken to avoid dereferencing the iterator twice. This
therefore requires the value type of the InputIterator to be
CopyConstructible. If the iterators are at least Forward Iterators,
then the iterator can be dereferenced twice, or a reference to the
result maintained, so the temporary is not required.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add "If InputIterator does not meet the requirements of forward
iterator, then the value type of InputIterator must be copy
constructible. Otherwise copy constructible is not required." to
25.3.8 [alg.remove] paragraph 6.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The assumption is that an input iterator can't be dereferenced
  twice.  There's no basis for that assumption in the Standard.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="368"></a>368. basic_string::replace has two "Throws" paragraphs</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2002-06-03 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
21.4.6.6 [string::replace] basic_string::replace, second
signature, given in paragraph 1, has two "Throws" paragraphs (3 and
5).
</p>

<p>
In addition, the second "Throws" paragraph (5) includes specification
(beginning with "Otherwise, the function replaces ...") that should be
part of the "Effects" paragraph.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is editorial. Both "throws" statements are true. The bug is
  just that the second one should be a sentence, part of the "Effects"
  clause, not a separate "Throws".  The project editor has been
  notified.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="372"></a>372. Inconsistent description of stdlib exceptions</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling], 18.7.1 [type.info] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Randy Maddox <b>Opened:</b> 2002-07-22 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>Paragraph 3 under clause 17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling], Restrictions on
Exception Handling, states that "Any other functions defined in the
C++ Standard Library that do not have an exception-specification may
throw implementation-defined exceptions unless otherwise specified."
This statement is followed by a reference to footnote 178 at the
bottom of that page which states, apparently in reference to the C++
Standard Library, that "Library implementations are encouraged (but
not required) to report errors by throwing exceptions from (or derived
from) the standard exceptions."</p>

<p>These statements appear to be in direct contradiction to clause
18.7.1 [type.info], which states "The class exception defines the
base class for the types of objects thrown as exceptions by the C++
Standard library components ...".</p>

<p>Is this inconsistent?</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Clause 17 is setting the overall library requirements, and it's
  clear and consistent.  This sentence from Clause 18 is descriptive,
  not setting a requirement on any other class.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="374"></a>374. moneypunct::frac_digits returns int not unsigned</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.3.1 [locale.moneypunct.members], 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-08-08 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In section 22.4.6.3.1 [locale.moneypunct.members], frac_digits() returns type
"int". This implies that frac_digits() might return a negative value,
but a negative value is nonsensical. It should return "unsigned".
</p>

<p>
Similarly, in section 22.4.6.3.2 [locale.moneypunct.virtuals], do_frac_digits()
should return "unsigned".
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Regardless of whether the return value is int or unsigned, it's
always conceivable that frac_digits might return a nonsensical
value. (Is 4294967295 really any better than -1?)  The clients of
moneypunct, the get and put facets, can and do perform range
checks.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="377"></a>377. basic_string::insert and length_error</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21.4.6.4 [string::insert] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ray Lischner <b>Opened:</b> 2002-08-16 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Section 21.4.6.4 [string::insert], paragraph 4, contains the following,
"Then throws length_error if size() &gt;= npos - rlen."
</p>

<p>
Related to DR 83, this sentence should probably be removed.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>This requirement is redundant but correct.  No change is
needed.</p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="378"></a>378. locale immutability and locale::operator=()</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#Dup">Dup</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">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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#31">31</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I think there is a problem with 22.1.1, p6 which says that
</p>
<pre>    -6- An instance of locale is immutable; once a facet reference
        is obtained from it, that reference remains usable as long
        as the locale value itself exists.
</pre>
<p>
and 22.1.1.2, p4:
</p>
<pre>    const locale&amp; operator=(const locale&amp; other) throw();

    -4- Effects: Creates a copy of other, replacing the current value.
</pre>
<p>
How can a reference to a facet obtained from a locale object remain
valid after an assignment that clearly must replace all the facets
in the locale object? Imagine a program such as this
</p>
<pre>    std::locale loc ("de_DE");
    const std::ctype&lt;char&gt; &amp;r0 = std::use_facet&lt;std::ctype&lt;char&gt; &gt;(loc);
    loc = std::locale ("en_US");
    const std::ctype&lt;char&gt; &amp;r1 = std::use_facet&lt;std::ctype&lt;char&gt; &gt;(loc);
</pre>
<p>
Is r0 really supposed to be preserved and destroyed only when loc goes
out of scope?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>[Summer '04 mid-meeting mailing: Martin and Dietmar believe this
  is a duplicate of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#31">31</a> and recommend that it be
  closed.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="382"></a>382. codecvt do_in/out result</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-08-30 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
It seems that the descriptions of codecvt do_in() and do_out() leave
sufficient room for interpretation so that two implementations of
codecvt may not work correctly with the same filebuf. Specifically,
the following seems less than adequately specified:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
  the conditions under which the functions terminate
</li>
<li>
  precisely when the functions return ok
</li>
<li>
  precisely when the functions return partial
</li>
<li>
  the full set of conditions when the functions return error
</li>
</ol>

<ol>
<li>
   22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], p2 says this about the effects of the
   function: ...Stops if it encounters a character it cannot
   convert...  This assumes that there *is* a character to
   convert. What happens when there is a sequence that doesn't form a
   valid source character, such as an unassigned or invalid UNICODE
   character, or a sequence that cannot possibly form a character
   (e.g., the sequence "\xc0\xff" in UTF-8)?
</li>
<li>
   Table 53 says that the function returns codecvt_base::ok
   to indicate that the function(s) "completed the conversion."
   Suppose that the source sequence is "\xc0\x80" in UTF-8,
   with from pointing to '\xc0' and (from_end==from + 1).
   It is not clear whether the return value should be ok
   or partial (see below).
</li>
<li>
   Table 53 says that the function returns codecvt_base::partial
   if "not all source characters converted." With the from pointers
   set up the same way as above, it is not clear whether the return
   value should be partial or ok (see above).
</li>
<li>
   Table 53, in the row describing the meaning of error mistakenly
   refers to a "from_type" character, without the symbol from_type
   having been defined. Most likely, the word "source" character
   is intended, although that is not sufficient. The functions
   may also fail when they encounter an invalid source sequence
   that cannot possibly form a valid source character (e.g., as
   explained in bullet 1 above).
</li>
</ol>
<p>
Finally, the conditions described at the end of 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], p4 don't seem to be possible:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
    "A return value of partial, if (from_next == from_end),
    indicates that either the destination sequence has not
    absorbed all the available destination elements, or that
    additional source elements are needed before another
    destination element can be produced."
</p></blockquote>
<p>
If the value is partial, it's not clear to me that (from_next
==from_end) could ever hold if there isn't enough room
in the destination buffer. In order for (from_next==from_end) to
hold, all characters in that range must have been successfully
converted (according to 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], p2) and since there are no
further source characters to convert, no more room in the
destination buffer can be needed.
</p>
<p>
It's also not clear to me that (from_next==from_end) could ever
hold if additional source elements are needed to produce another
destination character (not element as incorrectly stated in the
text). partial is returned if "not all source characters have
been converted" according to Table 53, which also implies that
(from_next==from) does NOT hold.
</p>
<p>
Could it be that the intended qualifying condition was actually
(from_next != from_end), i.e., that the sentence was supposed
to read
</p>
<blockquote><p>
    "A return value of partial, if (from_next != from_end),..."
</p></blockquote>
<p>
which would make perfect sense, since, as far as I understand it,
partial can only occur if (from_next != from_end)?
</p>
<p><i>[Lillehammer: Defer for the moment, but this really needs to be
  fixed. Right now, the description of codecvt is too vague for it to
  be a useful contract between providers and clients of codecvt
  facets.  (Note that both vendors and users can be both providers and
  clients of codecvt facets.) The major philosophical issue is whether
  the standard should only describe mappings that take a single wide
  character to multiple narrow characters (and vice versa), or whether
  it should describe fully general N-to-M conversions. When the
  original standard was written only the former was contemplated, but
  today, in light of the popularity of utf8 and utf16, that doesn't
  seem sufficient for C++0x. Bill supports general N-to-M conversions;
  we need to make sure Martin and Howard agree.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
codecvt is meant to be a 1-to-N to N-to-1 conversion. It does not work
well for N-to-M conversions. wbuffer_convert now exists, and handles
N-to-M cases. Also, there is a new specialization of codecvt that
permits UTF-16 &lt;-&gt; UTF-8 conversions.
</p>
<p>
NAD without prejudice. Will reopen if proposed resolution is supplied.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="385"></a>385. Does call by value imply the CopyConstructible requirement?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2002-10-23 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Many function templates have parameters that are passed by value;
a typical example is <tt>find_if</tt>'s <i>pred</i> parameter in
25.2.5 [alg.find].  Are the corresponding template parameters
(<tt>Predicate</tt> in this case) implicitly required to be
CopyConstructible, or does that need to be spelled out explicitly?
</p>

<p>
This isn't quite as silly a question as it might seem to be at first
sight.  If you call <tt>find_if</tt> in such a way that template
argument deduction applies, then of course you'll get call by value
and you need to provide a copy constructor.  If you explicitly provide
the template arguments, however, you can force call by reference by
writing something like <tt>find_if&lt;my_iterator,
my_predicate&amp;&gt;</tt>.  The question is whether implementation
are required to accept this, or whether this is ill-formed because
my_predicate&amp; is not CopyConstructible.
</p>

<p>
The scope of this problem, if it is a problem, is unknown.  Function
object arguments to generic algorithms in clauses 25 [algorithms]
and 26 [numerics] are obvious examples.  A review of the whole
library is necessary.
</p>
<p><i>[
This is really two issues.  First, predicates are typically passed by
value but we don't say they must be Copy Constructible.  They should
be. Second: is specialization allowed to transform value arguments
into references? References aren't copy constructible, so this should
not be allowed.
]</i></p>

<p><i>[
2007-01-12, Howard: First, despite the note above, references <b>are</b>
copy constructible. They just aren't assignable.  Second, this is very
closely related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#92">92</a> and should be consistent with that.
That issue already says that implementations are allowed to copy
function objects.  If one passes in a reference, it is copyable, but
susceptible to slicing if one passes in a reference to a base.  Third,
with rvalue reference in the language one only needs to satisfy
MoveConstructible to pass an rvalue "by value".  Though the function
might still copy the function object internally (requiring
CopyConstructible). Finally (and fwiw), if we wanted to, it is easy to
code all of the std::algorithms such that they do not copy function
objects internally.  One merely passes them by reference internally if
desired (this has been fully implemented and shipped for several years).
 If this were mandated, it would reverse <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#92">92</a>, allowing
function objects to reliably maintain state.  E.g. the example in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#92">92</a> would reliably remove only the third element.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Generic algorithms will be marked with concepts and these will imply a requirement
of MoveConstructible (not CopyConstructible).  The signature of the function will
then precisely describe and enforce the precise requirements.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="388"></a>388. Use of complex as a key in associative containers</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Practice with std::complex&lt;&gt; and the associative containers
occasionally reveals artificial and distracting issues with constructs
resembling: std::set&lt;std::complex&lt;double&gt; &gt; s;
</p>

<p>
The main reason for the above to fail is the absence of an approriate
definition for std::less&lt;std::complex&lt;T&gt; &gt;. That in turn comes from
the definition of the primary template std::less&lt;&gt; in terms of
operator&lt;.
</p>

<p>
The usual argument goes as follows: Since there is no ordering over
the complex field compatible with field operations it makes little
sense to define a function operator&lt; operating on the datatype
std::complex&lt;T&gt;.  That is fine. However, that reasoning does not carry
over to std::less&lt;T&gt; which is used, among other things, by associative
containers as an ordering useful to meet complexity requirements.
</p>

<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#348">348</a>.</p>

<p><i>[
Pre Bellevue: Reopened at the request of Alisdair.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This is a request for a design change, and not a defect in the standard.
It is in scope to consider, but the group feels that it is not a change
that we need to do. Is there a total ordering for floating point values,
including NaN? There is not a clear enough solution or big enough
problem for us to solve. Solving this problem would require solving the
problem for floating point, which is equally unclear. The LWG noted that
users who want to put objects into an associative container for which
operator&lt; isn't defined can simply provide their own comparison function
object. NAD
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Informally: Add a specialization of std::less for std::complex.</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Discussed in Santa Cruz.  An overwhelming majority of the LWG
believes this should not be treated a DR: it's a request for a design
change, not a defect in the existing standard.  Most people (10-3)
believed that we probably don't want this change, period: as with
issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#348">348</a>, it's hard to know where to draw the line.
The LWG noted that users who want to put objects into an associative
container for which <tt>operator&lt;</tt> isn't defined can simply
provide their own comparison function object.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="390"></a>390. CopyConstructible requirements too strict</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Doug Gregor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-10-24 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The CopyConstructible requirements in Table 30 state that for an
object t of type T (where T is CopyConstructible), the expression &amp;t
returns the address of t (with type T*). This requirement is overly
strict, in that it disallows types that overload operator&amp; to not
return a value of type T*. This occurs, for instance, in the <a href="http://www.boost.org/libs/lambda">Boost.Lambda</a> library, where
operator&amp; is overloaded for a Boost.Lambda function object to return
another function object.
</p>

<p>Example:</p>

<pre>  std::vector&lt;int&gt; u, v;
  int x;
  // ...
  std::transform(u.begin(), u.end(), std::back_inserter(v), _1 * x);
</pre>

<p>
_1 * x returns an unnamed function object with operator&amp; overloaded to
not return T* , therefore rendering the std::transform call ill-formed.
However, most standard library implementations will compile this code
properly, and the viability of such binder libraries is severely hindered
by the unnecessary restriction in the CopyConstructible requirements.
</p>

<p>
For reference, the address of an object can be retrieved without using
the address-of operator with the following function template:
</p>

<pre>  template &lt;typename T&gt; T* addressof(T&amp; v)
  {
    return reinterpret_cast&lt;T*&gt;(
         &amp;const_cast&lt;char&amp;&gt;(reinterpret_cast&lt;const volatile char &amp;&gt;(v)));
  }
</pre>

<p>
Note: this relates directly to library issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#350">350</a>, which
will need to be reexamined if the CopyConstructible requirements
change.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Remove the last two rows of Table 30, eliminating the requirements
that &amp;t and &amp;u return the address of t and u, respectively.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This was a deliberate design decision.  Perhaps it should be
   reconsidered for C++0x. </p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="392"></a>392. 'equivalence' for input iterators</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Corwin Joy <b>Opened:</b> 2002-12-11 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
In section 24.2.3 [input.iterators] table 72 -
'Input Iterator Requirements' we have as a postcondition of *a:
"If a==b and (a, b) is in the domain of == then *a is equivalent to *b".
</p>

<p>
In section 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal] it states that
"istreambuf_iterator::equal returns true if and only if both iterators
are at end-of-stream, or neither is at end-of-stream, <i>regardless of
what streambuf object they use</i>."  (My emphasis).
</p>

<p>
The defect is that either 'equivalent' needs to be more precisely
defined or the conditions for equality in 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal]
are incorrect. (Or both).
</p>

<p>Consider the following example:</p>
<pre>   #include &lt;iostream&gt;
   #include &lt;fstream&gt;
   #include &lt;iterator&gt;
   using namespace std;

   int main() {
    ifstream file1("file1.txt"), file2("file2.txt");
    istreambuf_iterator&lt;char&gt; f1(file1), f2(file2);
    cout &lt;&lt; "f1 == f2 : " &lt;&lt; boolalpha &lt;&lt; (f1 == f2) &lt;&lt; endl;
    cout &lt;&lt; "f1 = " &lt;&lt; *f1 &lt;&lt; endl;
    cout &lt;&lt; "f2 = " &lt;&lt; *f2 &lt;&lt; endl;
    return 0;
   }
</pre>

<p>Now assuming that neither f1 or f2 are at the end-of-stream then
f1 == f2 by 24.6.3.5 [istreambuf.iterator::equal].</p>

<p>However, it is unlikely that *f1 will give the same value as *f2 except
by accident.</p>

<p>So what does *f1 'equivalent' to *f2 mean?  I think the standard should
be clearer on this point, or at least be explicit that this does not
mean that *f1 and *f2 are required to have the same value in the case
of input iterators.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p><p>The two iterators aer not in the domain of ==</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="393"></a>393. do_in/do_out operation on state unclear</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2002-12-24 <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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
this DR follows the discussion on the previous thread "codecvt::do_in
not consuming external characters". It's just a clarification issue
and not a request for a change.
</p>
<p>
Can do_in()/do_out() produce output characters without consuming input 
characters as a result of operation on state?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a note at the end of 22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], 
paragraph 3:
</p>

<p>
[Note: As a result of operations on state, it can return ok or partial 
and set from_next == from and to_next != to. --end note]
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The submitter believes that standard already provides an affirmative
answer to the question. However, the current wording has induced a few
library implementors to make the incorrect assumption that
do_in()/do_out() always consume at least one internal character when
they succeed.
</p>

<p>
The submitter also believes that the proposed resolution is not in
conflict with the related issue 76. Moreover, by explicitly allowing
operations on state to produce characters, a codecvt implementation
may effectively implement N-to-M translations without violating the
"one character at a time" principle described in such issue. On a side
note, the footnote in the proposed resolution of issue 76 that
informally rules out N-to-M translations for basic_filebuf should be
removed if this issue is accepted as valid.
</p>


<p><i>[
Kona (2007): The proposed resolution is to add a note. Since this is
non-normative, the issue is editorial, but we believe that the note is
correct. Proposed Disposition: NAD, Editorial
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="394"></a>394. behavior of formatted output on failure</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2002-12-27 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There is a contradiction in Formatted output about what bit is
supposed to be set if the formatting fails. On sentence says it's
badbit and another that it's failbit.
</p>
<p>
27.6.2.5.1, p1 says in the Common Requirements on Formatted output
functions:
</p>
<pre>     ... If the generation fails, then the formatted output function
     does setstate(ios::failbit), which might throw an exception.
</pre>
<p>
27.6.2.5.2, p1 goes on to say this about Arithmetic Inserters:
</p>
<p>
     ... The formatting conversion occurs as if it performed the
     following code fragment:
</p>
<pre>     bool failed =
         use_facet&lt;num_put&lt;charT,ostreambuf_iterator&lt;charT,traits&gt;
         &gt; &gt;
         (getloc()).put(*this, *this, fill(), val). failed();

     ... If failed is true then does setstate(badbit) ...
</pre>
<p>
The original intent of the text, according to Jerry Schwarz (see
c++std-lib-10500), is captured in the following paragraph:
</p>
<p>
In general "badbit" should mean that the stream is unusable because
of some underlying failure, such as disk full or socket closure;
"failbit" should mean that the requested formatting wasn't possible
because of some inconsistency such as negative widths.  So typically
if you clear badbit and try to output something else you'll fail
again, but if you clear failbit and try to output something else
you'll succeed.
</p>
<p>
In the case of the arithmetic inserters, since num_put cannot
report failure by any means other than exceptions (in response
to which the stream must set badbit, which prevents the kind of
recoverable error reporting mentioned above), the only other
detectable failure is if the iterator returned from num_put
returns true from failed().
</p>
<p>
Since that can only happen (at least with the required iostream
specializations) under such conditions as the underlying failure
referred to above (e.g., disk full), setting badbit would seem
to be the appropriate response (indeed, it is required in
27.6.2.5.2, p1). It follows that failbit can never be directly
set by the arithmetic (it can only be set by the sentry object
under some unspecified conditions).
</p>
<p>
The situation is different for other formatted output functions
which can fail as a result of the streambuf functions failing
(they may do so by means other than exceptions), and which are
then required to set failbit.
</p>
<p>
The contradiction, then, is that ostream::operator&lt;&lt;(int) will
set badbit if the disk is full, while operator&lt;&lt;(ostream&amp;,
char) will set failbit under the same conditions. To make the behavior
consistent, the Common requirements sections for the Formatted output
functions should be changed as proposed below.
</p>
<p><i>[Kona: There's agreement that this is a real issue.  What we
  decided at Kona: 1. An error from the buffer (which can be detected
  either directly from streambuf's member functions or by examining a
  streambuf_iterator) should always result in badbit getting set.
  2. There should never be a circumstance where failbit gets set.
  That represents a formatting error, and there are no circumstances
  under which the output facets are specified as signaling a
  formatting error. (Even more so for string output that for numeric
  because there's nothing to format.)  If we ever decide to make it
  possible for formatting errors to exist then the facets can signal
  the error directly, and that should go in clause 22, not clause 27.
  3. The phrase "if generation fails" is unclear and should be
  eliminated.  It's not clear whether it's intended to mean a buffer
  error (e.g. a full disk), a formatting error, or something else.
  Most people thought it was supposed to refer to buffer errors; if
  so, we should say so.  Martin will provide wording.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD. This issue is already fixed.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="397"></a>397. ostream::sentry dtor throws exceptions</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
    <p>
17.4.4.8, p3 prohibits library dtors from throwing exceptions.
    </p>
    <p>
27.6.2.3, p4 says this about the ostream::sentry dtor:
    </p>
    <pre>    -4- If ((os.flags() &amp; ios_base::unitbuf) &amp;&amp; !uncaught_exception())
        is true, calls os.flush().
    </pre>
    <p>
27.6.2.6, p7 that describes ostream::flush() says:
    </p>
    <pre>    -7- If rdbuf() is not a null pointer, calls rdbuf()-&gt;pubsync().
        If that function returns ?-1 calls setstate(badbit) (which
        may throw ios_base::failure (27.4.4.3)).
    </pre>
    <p>
That seems like a defect, since both pubsync() and setstate() can
throw an exception. 
    </p>
<p><i>[
The contradiction is real.  Clause 17 says destructors may never
throw exceptions, and clause 27 specifies a destructor that does
throw.  In principle we might change either one.  We're leaning
toward changing clause 17: putting in an "unless otherwise specified"
clause, and then putting in a footnote saying the sentry destructor
is the only one that can throw.  PJP suggests specifying that
sentry::~sentry() should internally catch any exceptions it might cause.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#418">418</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#622">622</a> for related issues.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Move to Review. Add "Throws: nothing" to the specification of ostream::sentry::~sentry().
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-13 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposed resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a> is written to match the outcome
of this issue.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Open.  Our intent is to solve this issue with <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-03-06 Martin updates wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#835">835</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add after 27.7.2.4 [ostream::sentry] p17:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>~sentry();
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-17- If <tt>(os.flags() &amp; ios_base::unitbuf)</tt>
is <tt>true</tt>, calls <tt>os.flush()</tt>.
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="398"></a>398. effects of end-of-file on unformatted input functions</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
    <p>
While reviewing unformatted input member functions of istream
for their behavior when they encounter end-of-file during input
I found that the requirements vary, sometimes unexpectedly, and
in more than one case even contradict established practice (GNU
libstdc++ 3.2, IBM VAC++ 6.0, STLPort 4.5, SunPro 5.3, HP aCC
5.38, Rogue Wave libstd 3.1, and Classic Iostreams).
    </p>
    <p>
The following unformatted input member functions set eofbit if they
encounter an end-of-file (this is the expected behavior, and also
the behavior of all major implementations):
    </p>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    get (char_type*, streamsize, char_type);
    </pre>
    <p>
    Also sets failbit if it fails to extract any characters.
    </p>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    get (char_type*, streamsize);
    </pre>
    <p>
    Also sets failbit if it fails to extract any characters.
    </p>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    getline (char_type*, streamsize, char_type);
    </pre>
    <p>
    Also sets failbit if it fails to extract any characters.
    </p>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    getline (char_type*, streamsize);
    </pre>
    <p>
    Also sets failbit if it fails to extract any characters.
    </p>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    ignore (int, int_type);
    </pre>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    read (char_type*, streamsize);
    </pre>
    <p>
    Also sets failbit if it encounters end-of-file.
    </p>
    <pre>    streamsize readsome (char_type*, streamsize);
    </pre>

    <p>
The following unformated input member functions set failbit but
not eofbit if they encounter an end-of-file (I find this odd
since the functions make it impossible to distinguish a general
failure from a failure due to end-of-file; the requirement is
also in conflict with all major implementation which set both
eofbit and failbit):
    </p>
    <pre>    int_type get();
    </pre>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    get (char_type&amp;);
    </pre>
    <p>
These functions only set failbit of they extract no characters,
otherwise they don't set any bits, even on failure (I find this
inconsistency quite unexpected; the requirement is also in
conflict with all major implementations which set eofbit
whenever they encounter end-of-file):
    </p>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    get (basic_streambuf&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;, char_type);
    </pre>
    <pre>    basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
    get (basic_streambuf&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;);
    </pre>
    <p>
This function sets no bits (all implementations except for
STLport and Classic Iostreams set eofbit when they encounter
end-of-file):
    </p>
    <pre>    int_type peek ();
    </pre>
<p>Informally, what we want is a global statement of intent saying
  that eofbit gets set if we trip across EOF, and then we can take
  away the specific wording for individual functions.  A full review
  is necessary.  The wording currently in the standard is a mishmash,
  and changing it on an individual basis wouldn't make things better.
  Dietmar will do this work.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.  See 27.7.1.1 [istream] p3.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="399"></a>399. volations of unformatted input function requirements</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
    <p>
The Effects clauses for the two functions below violate the
general requirements on unformatted input functions outlined
in 27.6.1.3: they do not begin by constructing a sentry object.
Instead, they begin by calling widen ('\n'), which may throw
an exception. The exception is then allowed to propagate from
the unformatted input function irrespective of the setting of
exceptions().
    </p>
    <p>
Note that in light of 27.6.1.1, p3 and p4, the fact that the
functions allow exceptions thrown from widen() to propagate
may not strictly speaking be a defect (but the fact that the
functions do not start by constructing a sentry object still
is). However, since an exception thrown from ctype&lt;charT&gt;
::widen() during any other input operation (say, from within
a call to num_get&lt;charT&gt;::get()) will be caught and cause
badbit to be set, these two functions should not be treated
differently for the sake of consistency.
    </p>
  

<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Not a defect.  The standard is consistent, and the behavior required
by the standard is unambiguous.  Yes, it's theoretically possible for
widen to throw.  (Not that this will happen for the default ctype
facet or for most real-world replacement ctype facets.)  Users who
define ctype facets that can throw, and who care about this behavior,
can use alternative signatures that don't call widen.
</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="408"></a>408. Is vector&lt;reverse_iterator&lt;char*&gt; &gt; forbidden?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2 [iterator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.requirements">issues</a> in [iterator.requirements].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I've been discussing iterator semantics with Dave Abrahams, and a 
surprise has popped up.  I don't think this has been discussed before.
</p>

<p>
X [iterator.concepts] says that the only operation that can be performed on "singular"
iterator values is to assign a non-singular value to them.  (It 
doesn't say they can be destroyed, and that's probably a defect.)  
Some implementations have taken this to imply that there is no need 
to initialize the data member of a reverse_iterator&lt;&gt; in the default
constructor.  As a result, code like
</p>
<blockquote><pre>  std::vector&lt;std::reverse_iterator&lt;char*&gt; &gt; v(7);
  v.reserve(1000);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
invokes undefined behavior, because it must default-initialize the
vector elements, and then copy them to other storage.  Of course many 
other vector operations on these adapters are also left undefined,
and which those are is not reliably deducible from the standard.
</p>

<p>
I don't think that 24.1 was meant to make standard-library iterator 
types unsafe.  Rather, it was meant to restrict what operations may 
be performed by functions which take general user- and standard 
iterators as arguments, so that raw pointers would qualify as
iterators.  However, this is not clear in the text, others have come 
to the opposite conclusion.
</p>

<p>
One question is whether the standard iterator adaptors have defined
copy semantics.  Another is whether they have defined destructor
semantics: is
</p>
<blockquote><pre>  { std::vector&lt;std::reverse_iterator&lt;char*&gt; &gt;  v(7); }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
undefined too?
</p>

<p>
Note this is not a question of whether algorithms are allowed to
rely on copy semantics for arbitrary iterators, just whether the
types we actually supply support those operations.  I believe the 
resolution must be expressed in terms of the semantics of the 
adapter's argument type.  It should make clear that, e.g., the 
reverse_iterator&lt;T&gt; constructor is actually required to execute
T(), and so copying is defined if the result of T() is copyable.
</p>

<p>
Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#235">235</a>, which defines reverse_iterator's default
constructor more precisely, has some relevance to this issue.
However, it is not the whole story.
</p>

<p>
The issue was whether 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>  reverse_iterator() { }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
is allowed, vs. 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>  reverse_iterator() : current() { }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The difference is when T is char*, where the first leaves the member
uninitialized, and possibly equal to an existing pointer value, or
(on some targets) may result in a hardware trap when copied.
</p>

<p>
8.5 paragraph 5 seems to make clear that the second is required to
satisfy DR <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#235">235</a>, at least for non-class Iterator argument
types.
</p>

<p>
But that only takes care of reverse_iterator, and doesn't establish
a policy for all iterators.  (The reverse iterator adapter was just
an example.)  In particular, does my function
</p>
<blockquote><pre>  template &lt;typename Iterator&gt;
    void f() { std::vector&lt;Iterator&gt;  v(7); } 
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
evoke undefined behavior for some conforming iterator definitions?
I think it does, now, because vector&lt;&gt; will destroy those singular
iterator values, and that's explicitly disallowed.
</p>

<p>
24.1 shouldn't give blanket permission to copy all singular iterators,
because then pointers wouldn't qualify as iterators.  However, it
should allow copying of that subset of singular iterator values that
are default-initialized, and it should explicitly allow destroying any
iterator value, singular or not, default-initialized or not.
</p>

<p>Related issues: <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#1012">1012</a></p>
<p><i>[
We don't want to require all singular iterators to be copyable,
because that is not the case for pointers.  However, default
construction may be a special case.  Issue: is it really default
construction we want to talk about, or is it something like value
initialization?  We need to check with core to see whether default
constructed pointers are required to be copyable; if not, it would be
wrong to impose so strict a requirement for iterators.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-05-10 Alisdair provided wording.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The comments regarding destroying singular iterators have already been
resolved.  That just leaves copying (with moving implied).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is related to LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>.
</p>
<p>
Note that there is a bug in the proposed resolution to LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a>. The
change to  [reverse.iter.con] should be modified so that the word
"default" in the second sentence of the Effects clause is replaced by
"value."
</p>
<p>
We believe that the proposed fix to LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a> (now corrected) is
sufficient to solve the problem for reverse_iterator. However, Alisdair
pointed out that LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1012">1012</a> does not solve the general problem for authors
of iterator adaptors.
</p>
<p>
There are some problems with the proposed resolution. The phrase "safely
copyable" is not a term of art. Also, it mentions a
DefaultConstructible? concept.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review after Alisdair updates the wording.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-31 Alisdair revised wording:
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-08-17 Alisdair and Daniel collaborate on slightly revised wording.
This issue depends upon <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#724">724</a>
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
There is a clear dependency on <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1213">1213</a>, because the term "singular",
which is used as part of the resolution, is not properly defined yet.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Open. Alisdair will provide improved wording to make
this have "value semantics" and otherwise behave like a valid iterator.
</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a new paragrpah to Iterator concepts 24.2 [iterator.requirements] after para 5 (the one describing
singular iterators)
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
Just as a regular pointer to an array guarantees that there is a pointer
value pointing past the last element of the array, so for any iterator
type there is an iterator value that points past the last element of a
corresponding container. These values are called <i>past-the-end</i> values.
Values of an iterator <tt>i</tt> for which the expression <tt>*i</tt> is defined are called
<i>dereferenceable</i>. The library never assumes that past-the-end values are
dereferenceable. Iterators can also have singular values that are not
associated with any container. [<i>Example:</i> After the declaration of an
uninitialized pointer <tt>x</tt> (as with <tt>int* x;</tt>), <tt>x</tt> must always be assumed to
have a singular value of a pointer. � <i>end example</i>] Results of most
expressions are undefined for singular values; the only exceptions are
destroying an iterator that holds a singular value and the assignment of
a non-singular value to an iterator that holds a singular value. In this
case the singular value is overwritten the same way as any other value.
Dereferenceable values are always non-singular.
</p>
<p><ins>
After value-initialization, any iterator that satisfies the
<tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> requirements ([defaultconstructible]) shall not introduce undefined behaviour
when used <ins>as</ins> the
source of a copy or move operation, even if it would
otherwise be singular. [<i>Note:</i> This guarantee is not offered for
default-initialization (8.5 [dcl.init]), although the distinction only
matters for types with trivial default constructors such as pointers. �
<i>end note</i>]
</ins></p>


</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="417"></a>417. what does ctype::do_widen() return on failure</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The Effects and Returns clauses of the do_widen() member function of
the ctype facet fail to specify the behavior of the function on failure.
That the function may not be able to simply cast the narrow character
argument to the type of the result since doing so may yield the wrong value
for some wchar_t encodings. Popular implementations of ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt; that
use mbtowc() and UTF-8 as the native encoding (e.g., GNU glibc) will fail
when the argument's MSB is set. There is no way for the the rest of locale
and iostream to reliably detect this failure. 
</p>
<p><i>[Kona: This is a real problem.  Widening can fail.  It's unclear
  what the solution should be.  Returning WEOF works for the wchar_t
  specialization, but not in general.  One option might be to add a
  default, like <i>narrow</i>.  But that's an incompatible change.
  Using <i>traits::eof</i> might seem like a good idea, but facets
  don't have access to traits (a recurring problem).  We could
  have <i>widen</i> throw an exception, but that's a scary option;
  existing library components aren't written with the assumption
  that <i>widen</i> can throw.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD. The behavior is specified for all of the facets that an
implementation is required to provide, for the basic character set.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="418"></a>418. exceptions thrown during iostream cleanup</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The dtor of the ios_base::Init object is supposed to call flush() on the
6 standard iostream objects cout, cerr, clog, wcout, wcerr, and wclog.
This call may cause an exception to be thrown.
</p>

<p>
17.4.4.8, p3 prohibits all library destructors from throwing exceptions.
</p>

<p>
The question is: What should this dtor do if one or more of these calls
to flush() ends up throwing an exception? This can happen quite easily
if one of the facets installed in the locale imbued in the iostream
object throws.
</p>
<p><i>[Kona: We probably can't do much better than what we've got, so
  the LWG is leaning toward NAD.  At the point where the standard
  stream objects are being cleaned up, the usual error reporting
  mechanism are all unavailable.  And exception from flush at this
  point will definitely cause problems.  A quality implementation
  might reasonably swallow the exception, or call abort, or do
  something even more drastic.]</i></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-defects.html#622">622</a> for related issues.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD, no consensus for change.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="421"></a>421. is basic_streambuf copy-constructible?</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The reflector thread starting with c++std-lib-11346 notes that the class
template basic_streambuf, along with basic_stringbuf and basic_filebuf,
is copy-constructible but that the semantics of the copy constructors
are not defined anywhere. Further, different implementations behave
differently in this respect: some prevent copy construction of objects
of these types by declaring their copy ctors and assignment operators
private, others exhibit undefined behavior, while others still give
these operations well-defined semantics.
</p>

<p>
Note that this problem doesn't seem to be isolated to just the three
types mentioned above. A number of other types in the library section
of the standard provide a compiler-generated copy ctor and assignment
operator yet fail to specify their semantics.  It's believed that the
only types for which this is actually a problem (i.e. types where the
compiler-generated default may be inappropriate and may not have been
intended) are locale facets.  See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#439">439</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD. Option B is already in the Working Draft.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
27.5.2 [lib.streambuf]:  Add into the synopsis, public section, just above the destructor declaration:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>basic_streambuf(const basic_streambuf&amp; sb);
basic_streambuf&amp; operator=(const basic_streambuf&amp; sb);
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>Insert after 27.5.2.1, paragraph 2:</p>
<blockquote>
<pre>basic_streambuf(const basic_streambuf&amp; sb);
</pre>

<p>Constructs a copy of sb.</p>
<p>Postcondtions:</p>
<pre>                eback() == sb.eback()
                gptr()  == sb.gptr()
                egptr() == sb.egptr()
                pbase() == sb.pbase()
                pptr()  == sb.pptr()
                epptr() == sb.epptr()
                getloc() == sb.getloc()
</pre>

<pre>basic_streambuf&amp; operator=(const basic_streambuf&amp; sb);
</pre>

<p>Assigns the data members of sb to this.</p>

<p>Postcondtions:</p>
<pre>                eback() == sb.eback()
                gptr()  == sb.gptr()
                egptr() == sb.egptr()
                pbase() == sb.pbase()
                pptr()  == sb.pptr()
                epptr() == sb.epptr()
                getloc() == sb.getloc()
</pre>

<p>Returns: *this.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>27.7.1 [lib.stringbuf]:</p>

<p><b>Option A:</b></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Insert into the basic_stringbuf synopsis in the private section:</p>

<pre>basic_stringbuf(const basic_stringbuf&amp;);             // not defined
basic_stringbuf&amp; operator=(const basic_stringbuf&amp;);  // not defined
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p><b>Option B:</b></p>

<blockquote>
<p>Insert into the basic_stringbuf synopsis in the public section:</p>

<pre>basic_stringbuf(const basic_stringbuf&amp; sb);
basic_stringbuf&amp; operator=(const basic_stringbuf&amp; sb);
</pre>

<p>27.7.1.1, insert after paragraph 4:</p>

<pre>basic_stringbuf(const basic_stringbuf&amp; sb);</pre>

<p>
Constructs an independent copy of sb as if with sb.str(), and with the openmode that sb was constructed with.
</p>

<p>Postcondtions: </p>
<pre>               str() == sb.str()
               gptr()  - eback() == sb.gptr()  - sb.eback()
               egptr() - eback() == sb.egptr() - sb.eback()
               pptr()  - pbase() == sb.pptr()  - sb.pbase()
               getloc() == sb.getloc()
</pre>

<p>
Note:  The only requirement on epptr() is that it point beyond the initialized range if an output sequence exists.  There is no requirement that epptr() - pbase() == sb.epptr() - sb.pbase().
</p>

<pre>basic_stringbuf&amp; operator=(const basic_stringbuf&amp; sb);</pre>
<p>
After assignment the basic_stringbuf has the same state as if it were initially copy constructed from sb, except that the basic_stringbuf is allowed to retain any excess capacity it might have, which may in turn effect the value of epptr().
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>27.8.1.1 [lib.filebuf]</p>

<p>Insert at the bottom of the basic_filebuf synopsis:</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>private:
  basic_filebuf(const basic_filebuf&amp;);             // not defined
  basic_filebuf&amp; operator=(const basic_filebuf&amp;);  // not defined
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><i>[Kona: this is an issue for basic_streambuf itself and for its
  derived classes.  We are leaning toward allowing basic_streambuf to
  be copyable, and specifying its precise semantics.  (Probably the
  obvious: copying the buffer pointers.)  We are less sure whether
  the streambuf derived classes should be copyable.  Howard will
  write up a proposal.]</i></p>


<p><i>[Sydney: Dietmar presented a new argument against basic_streambuf
  being copyable: it can lead to an encapsulation violation. Filebuf
  inherits from streambuf. Now suppose you inhert a my_hijacking_buf
  from streambuf. You can copy the streambuf portion of a filebuf to a
  my_hijacking_buf, giving you access to the pointers into the
  filebuf's internal buffer. Perhaps not a very strong argument, but
  it was strong enough to make people nervous. There was weak
  preference for having streambuf not be copyable. There was weak
  preference for having stringbuf not be copyable even if streambuf
  is. Move this issue to open for now.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2007-01-12, Howard:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1862.html#27.5.2%20-%20Class%20template%20basic_streambuf%3CcharT,traits%3E">Rvalue Reference Recommendations for Chapter 27</a>
recommends protected copy constructor and assignment for <tt>basic_streambuf</tt> with the same semantics
as would be generated by the compiler.  These members aid in derived classes implementing move semantics.
A protected copy constructor and copy assignment operator do not expose encapsulation more so than it is
today as each data member of a <tt>basic_streambuf</tt> is already both readable and writable by derived
classes via various get/set protected member functions (<tt>eback()</tt>, <tt>setp()</tt>, etc.).  Rather
a protected copy constructor and copy assignment operator simply make the job of derived classes implementing
move semantics less tedious and error prone.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
27.5.2 [lib.streambuf]: The proposed basic_streambuf copy constructor
and assignment operator are the same as currently implied by the lack
of declarations: public and simply copies the data members.  This
resolution is not a change but a clarification of the current
standard.
</p>

<p>
27.7.1 [lib.stringbuf]: There are two reasonable options: A) Make
basic_stringbuf not copyable.  This is likely the status-quo of
current implementations.  B) Reasonable copy semantics of
basic_stringbuf can be defined and implemented.  A copyable
basic_streambuf is arguably more useful than a non-copyable one.  This
should be considered as new functionality and not the fixing of a
defect.  If option B is chosen, ramifications from issue 432 are taken
into account.
</p>

<p>
27.8.1.1 [lib.filebuf]: There are no reasonable copy semantics for
basic_filebuf.
</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="423"></a>423. effects of negative streamsize in iostreams</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
A third party test suite tries to exercise istream::ignore(N) with
a negative value of N and expects that the implementation will treat
N as if it were 0. Our implementation asserts that (N &gt;= 0) holds and
aborts the test.
</p>

<p>
I can't find anything in section 27 that prohibits such values but I don't
see what the effects of such calls should be, either (this applies to
a number of unformatted input functions as well as some member functions
of the basic_streambuf template).
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is related to LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#255">255</a>.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
I propose that we add to each function in clause 27 that takes an argument,
say N, of type streamsize a Requires clause saying that "N &gt;= 0." The intent
is to allow negative streamsize values in calls to precision() and width()
but disallow it in calls to streambuf::sgetn(), istream::ignore(), or
ostream::write().
</p>

<p><i>[Kona: The LWG agreed that this is probably what we want.  However, we
  need a review to find all places where functions in clause 27 take
  arguments of type streamsize that shouldn't be allowed to go
  negative.  Martin will do that review.]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="424"></a>424. normative notes</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.1.2 [structure.summary] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The text in 17.3.1.1, p1 says:
<br>

"Paragraphs labelled "Note(s):" or "Example(s):" are informative, other
paragraphs are normative."
<br>

The library section makes heavy use of paragraphs labeled "Notes(s),"
some of which are clearly intended to be normative (see list 1), while
some others are not (see list 2). There are also those where the intent
is not so clear (see list 3).
<br><br>

List 1 -- Examples of (presumably) normative Notes:
<br>

20.9.5.1 [allocator.members], p3,<br>
20.9.5.1 [allocator.members], p10,<br>
21.4.2 [string.cons], p11,<br>
22.3.1.2 [locale.cons], p11,<br>
23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers], p2,<br>
25.4.7 [alg.min.max], p3,<br>
26.4.6 [complex.ops], p15,<br>
27.6.2.4.3 [streambuf.virt.get], p7.<br>
<br>

List 2 -- Examples of (presumably) informative Notes:
<br>

18.6.1.3 [new.delete.placement], p3,<br>
21.4.6.6 [string::replace], p14,<br>
22.4.1.4.2 [locale.codecvt.virtuals], p3,<br>
25.2.4 [alg.foreach], p4,<br>
26.4.5 [complex.member.ops], p1,<br>
27.5.2.5 [ios.base.storage], p6.<br>
<br>

List 3 -- Examples of Notes that are not clearly either normative
or informative:
<br>

22.3.1.2 [locale.cons], p8,<br>
22.3.1.5 [locale.statics], p6,<br>
27.6.2.4.5 [streambuf.virt.put], p4.<br>
<br>

None of these lists is meant to be exhaustive.
</p>

<p><i>[Definitely a real problem.  The big problem is there's material
  that doesn't quite fit any of the named paragraph categories
  (e.g. <b>Effects</b>).  Either we need a new kind of named
  paragraph, or we need to put more material in unnamed paragraphs
  jsut after the signature.  We need to talk to the Project Editor
  about how to do this.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue: Specifics of list 3: First 2 items correct in std (22.1.1.2,
22.1.1.5) Third item should be non-normative (27.5.2.4.5), which Pete
will handle editorially.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
post San Francisco:  Howard: reopened, needs attention.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[Pete: I changed the paragraphs marked "Note" and "Notes" to use "Remark" and "Remarks".
Fixed as editorial.  This change has been in the WD since the post-Redmond mailing, in 2004.
Recommend NAD.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia:  We feel that the references in List 2 above should be changed from <i>Remarks</i>
to <i>Notes</i>.  We also feel that those items in List 3 need to be double checked for
the same change.  Alan and Pete to review.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
A spot-check of List 2 suggests the issue is still relevant,
and a review of List 3 still seems called-for.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="429"></a>429. typo in basic_ios::clear(iostate)</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#Dup">Dup</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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#412">412</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
        <p>

The Effects clause in 27.4.4.3, p5 describing the effects of a call to
the ios_base member function clear(iostate state) says that the function
only throws if the respective bits are already set prior to the function
call. That's obviously not the intent. If it was, a call to clear(badbit)
on an object for which (rdstate() == goodbit &amp;&amp; exceptions() == badbit)
holds would not result in an exception being thrown.

        </p>
    
    <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
        <p>

The text ought to be changed from
<br>

"If (rdstate() &amp; exceptions()) == 0, returns. ..."
<br>

to
<br>

"If (state &amp; exceptions()) == 0, returns. ..."
        </p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="433"></a>433. Contradiction in specification of unexpected()</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> D.13.3 [unexpected] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Vyatcheslav Sysoltsev <b>Opened:</b> 2003-09-29 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Clause 15.5.2 [except.unexpected] paragraph 1 says that "void unexpected();
is called (18.7.2) immediately after completing the stack unwinding
for the former function", but 18.7.2.4 (Effects) says that "void
unexpected(); . . . Calls the unexpected_handler function in effect
immediately after evaluating the throwexpression (18.7.2.2),".  Isn't
here a contradiction: 15.5.2 requires stack have been unwound when in
void unexpected() and therefore in unexpected_handler but 18.7.2.4
claims that unexpected_handler is called "in effect immediately" after
evaluation of throw expression is finished, so there is no space left
for stack to be unwound therefore?  I think the phrase "in effect
immediately" should be removed from the standard because it brings
ambiguity in understanding.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>There is no contradiction.  The phrase "in effect immediately" is
  just to clarify which handler is to be called.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="437"></a>437. Formatted output of function pointers is confusing</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ivan Godard <b>Opened:</b> 2003-10-24 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Given:
</p>
<pre>void f(int) {}
void(*g)(int) = f;
cout &lt;&lt; g;
</pre>

<p>
(with the expected #include and usings), the value printed is a rather
surprising "true". Rather useless too.
</p>

<p>The standard defines:</p>

<pre>ostream&amp; operator&lt;&lt;(ostream&amp;, void*);</pre>

<p>which picks up all data pointers and prints their hex value, but does
not pick up function pointers because there is no default conversion
from function pointer to void*. Absent that, we fall back to legacy
conversions from C and the function pointer is converted to bool.
</p>

<p>There should be an analogous inserter that prints the address of a
  function pointer.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is indeed a wart, but there is no good way to solve it.  C
  doesn't provide a portable way of outputting the address of a
  function point either.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="439"></a>439. Should facets be copyable?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2003-11-02 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The following facets classes have no copy constructors described in
  the standard, which, according to the standard, means that they are
  supposed to use the compiler-generated defaults.  Default copy
  behavior is probably inappropriate.  We should either make these
  classes uncopyable or else specify exactly what their constructors do.</p>

<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#421">421</a>.</p>

<pre>        ctype_base
        ctype
        ctype_byname
        ctype&lt;char&gt;
        ctype_byname&lt;char&gt;
        codecvt_base
        codecvt
        codecvt_byname
        num_get
        num_put
        numpunct
        numpunct_byname
        collate
        collate_byname
        time_base
        time_get
        time_get_byname
        time_put
        time_put_byname
        money_get
        money_put
        money_base
        moneypunct
        moneypunct_byname
        messages_base
        messages
        messages_byname
</pre>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The copy constructor in the base class is private.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="440"></a>440. Should std::complex use unqualified transcendentals?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.4.8 [complex.transcendentals] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2003-11-05 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Operations like <tt>pow</tt> and <tt>exp</tt> on
<tt>complex&lt;T&gt;</tt> are typically implemented in terms of
operations like <tt>sin</tt> and <tt>cos</tt> on <tt>T</tt>.  
Should implementations write this as <tt>std::sin</tt>, or as plain
unqualified <tt>sin</tt>?
</p>

<p>The issue, of course, is whether we want to use
argument-dependent lookup in the case where <tt>T</tt> is a
user-defined type.  This is similar to the issue of valarray
transcendentals, as discussed in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#226">226</a>.</p>

<p>This issue differs from valarray transcendentals in two important
ways.  First, "the effect of instantiating the template
<tt>complex</tt> for types other than float, double or long double is
unspecified." (26.4.1 [complex.syn]) Second, the standard does not
dictate implementation, so there is no guarantee that a particular
real math function is used in the implementation of a particular
complex function.</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>If you instantiate std::complex for user-defined types, all bets
are off.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="446"></a>446. Iterator equality between different containers</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2 [iterator.requirements], 23.2 [container.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Andy Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2003-12-16 <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#iterator.requirements">issues</a> in [iterator.requirements].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
What requirements does the standard place on equality comparisons between
iterators that refer to elements of different containers.  For example, if
v1 and v2 are empty vectors, is v1.end() == v2.end() allowed to yield true?
Is it allowed to throw an exception?
</p>

<p>
The standard appears to be silent on both questions.
</p>
<p><i>[Sydney: The intention is that comparing two iterators from
different containers is undefined, but it's not clear if we say that,
or even whether it's something we should be saying in clause 23 or in
clause 24.  Intuitively we might want to say that equality is defined
only if one iterator is reachable from another, but figuring out how
to say it in any sensible way is a bit tricky: reachability is defined
in terms of equality, so we can't also define equality in terms of
reachability.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Daniel volunteered to work on this.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-09-20 Daniel provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave as Open. Alisdair has volunteered to refine the wording.
</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Insert a new paragraph between 24.2 [iterator.requirements]/7+8:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
[..] The result of the application of functions in the library to invalid
ranges is undefined.
</p>

<p><ins>The result of directly or indirectly evaluating any comparison function
or the binary - operator with two iterator values as arguments that
were obtained
from two different ranges <tt>r1</tt> and <tt>r2</tt> (including their past-the-end values) which
are not subranges of one common range is undefined, unless explicitly
described otherwise.</ins>
</p>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="447"></a>447. Wrong template argument for time facets</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2003-12-26 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#327">327</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
22.1.1.1.1/4, table 52, "Required Instantiations", lists, among others:
</p>
<pre>    time_get&lt;char,InputIterator&gt;
    time_get_byname&lt;char,InputIterator&gt;
    time_get&lt;wchar_t,OutputIterator&gt;
    time_get_byname&lt;wchar_t,OutputIterator&gt;
</pre>

<p>
The second argument to the last two should be InputIterator, not
OutputIterator.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the second template argument to InputIterator.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="450"></a>450. set::find is inconsistent with associative container requirements</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#Dup">Dup</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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#214">214</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>map/multimap have:</p>

<pre>    iterator find(const key_type&amp; x) const;
    const_iterator find(const key_type&amp; x) const;
</pre>

<p>
which is consistent with the table of associative container requirements.
But set/multiset have:
</p>
<pre>    iterator find(const key_type&amp;) const;
</pre>

<p>
set/multiset should look like map/multimap, and honor the requirements
table, in this regard.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="451"></a>451. Associative erase should return an iterator</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], 23.6 [associative] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bill Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2004-01-30 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#130">130</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>map/multimap/set/multiset have:</p>
<pre>    void erase(iterator);
    void erase(iterator, iterator);
</pre>

<p>But there's no good reason why these can't return an iterator, as for
vector/deque/list:</p>
<pre>    iterator erase(iterator);
    iterator erase(iterator, iterator);
</pre>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Informally: The table of associative container requirements, and the
relevant template classes, should return an iterator designating the
first element beyond the erased subrange.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="452"></a>452.  locale::combine should be permitted to generate a named locale</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<pre>template&lt;class Facet&gt;
    locale::combine(const locale&amp;) const;
</pre>
<p>
is obliged to create a locale that has no name. This is overspecification
and overkill. The resulting locale should follow the usual rules -- it
has a name if the locale argument has a name and Facet is one of the
standard facets.
</p>

<p><i>[
 Sydney and post-Sydney (see c++std-lib-13439, c++std-lib-13440,
 c++std-lib-13443): agreed that it's overkill to say that the locale
 is obligated to be nameless.  However, we also can't require it to
 have a name.  At the moment, locale names are based on categories
 and not on individual facets.  If a locale contains two different
 facets of different names from the same category, then this would
 not fit into existing naming schemes.  We need to give
 implementations more freedom.  Bill will provide wording.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>After further discussion the LWG decided to close this as NAD.
  The fundamental problem is that names right now are per-category,
  not per-facet.  The <tt>combine</tt> member function works at the
  wrong level of granularity.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="454"></a>454. basic_filebuf::open should accept wchar_t names</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#105">105</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<pre>    basic_filebuf *basic_filebuf::open(const char *, ios_base::open_mode);
</pre>

<p>should be supplemented with the overload:</p>

<pre>    basic_filebuf *basic_filebuf::open(const wchar_t *, ios_base::open_mode);
</pre>

<p>
Depending on the operating system, one of these forms is fundamental and
the other requires an implementation-defined mapping to determine the
actual filename.
</p>

<p><i>[Sydney: Yes, we want to allow wchar_t filenames.  Bill will
  provide wording.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
In Toronto we noted that this is issue 5 from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1569.htm">N1569</a>.
]</i></p>

<p>
How does this interact with the newly-defined character types, and how
do we avoid interface explosion considering <tt>std::string</tt> overloads that
were added? Propose another solution that is different than the
suggestion proposed by PJP.
</p>
<p>
Suggestion is to make a member template function for <tt>basic_string</tt> (for
<tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt>, <tt>u16char</tt>, <tt>u32char</tt> instantiations), and then just keep a
<tt>const char*</tt> member.
</p>
<p>
Goal is to do implicit conversion between character string literals to
appropriate <tt>basic_string</tt> type. Not quite sure if this is possible.
</p>
<p>
Implementors are free to add specific overloads for non-char character
types.
</p>

<p><i>[
Martin adds pre-Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Please see <a href="http://wiki.dinkumware.com/twiki/pub/Wg21sophiaAntipolis/LibraryWorkingGroup/issue-454.html">issue 454: problems and solutions</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Beman is concerned that making these changes to <tt>basic_filebuf</tt> is not
usefully changed unless <tt>fstream</tt> is also changed; this also only handles
<tt>wchar_t</tt> and not other character types.
</p>
<p>
The TR2 filesystem library is a more complete solution, but is not available soon.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Martin adds:  please reference
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2683.html">N2683</a> for
problems and solutions.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>Change from:</p>
<blockquote>
<pre>basic_filebuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* open(
    const char* s,
    ios_base::openmode mode );
</pre>

<p>
Effects: If is_open() != false, returns a null pointer.
Otherwise, initializes the filebuf as required. It then
opens a file, if possible, whose name is the NTBS s ("as if"
by calling std::fopen(s,modstr)).</p>
</blockquote>

<p>to:</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>basic_filebuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* open(
    const char* s,
    ios_base::openmode mode );

basic_filebuf&lt;charT,traits&gt;* open(
    const wchar_t* ws,
    ios_base::openmode mode );
</pre>

<p>
Effects: If is_open() != false, returns a null pointer.
Otherwise, initializes the filebuf as required. It then
opens a file, if possible, whose name is the NTBS s ("as if"
by calling std::fopen(s,modstr)).
For the second signature, the NTBS s is determined from the
WCBS ws in an implementation-defined manner.
</p>

<p>
(NOTE: For a system that "naturally" represents a filename
as a WCBS, the NTBS s in the first signature may instead
be mapped to a WCBS; if so, it follows the same mapping
rules as the first argument to open.)
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Slightly controversial, but by a 7-1 straw poll the LWG agreed to move
this to Ready.  The controversy was because the mapping between wide
names and files in a filesystem is implementation defined.  The
counterargument, which most but not all LWG members accepted, is that
the mapping between narrow files names and files is also
implemenation defined.</p>

<p><i>[Lillehammer: Moved back to "open" status, at Beman's urging.
(1) Why just basic_filebuf, instead of also basic_fstream (and
possibly other things too). (2) Why not also constructors that take
std::basic_string? (3) We might want to wait until we see Beman's
filesystem library; we might decide that it obviates this.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
post Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Move again to Ready.
</p>
<p>
There is a timing issue here. Since the filesystem library will not be
in C++0x, this should be brought forward. This solution would remain
valid in the context of the proposed filesystem.
</p>
<p>
This issue has been kicking around for a while, and the wchar_t addition
alone would help many users. Thus, we suggest putting this on the
reflector list with an invitation for someone to produce proposed
wording that covers basic_fstream. In the meantime, we suggest that the
proposed wording be adopted as-is.
</p>
<p>
If more of the Lillehammer questions come back, they should be
introduced as separate issues.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Some existing implementations provide overload already. Expected
filesystem "path" object overloads neatly, without surprises; implying
NAD.
</blockquote>







<hr>
<h3><a name="458"></a>458. 24.1.5 contains unintended limitation for operator-</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Frey <b>Opened:</b> 2004-02-27 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 24.1.5 [lib.random.access.iterators], table 76 the operational
semantics for the expression "r -= n" are defined as "return r += -n".
This means, that the expression -n must be valid, which is not the case
for unsigned types.
</p>

<p><i>[
Sydney: Possibly not a real problem, since difference type is required
to be a signed integer type. However, the wording in the standard may
be less clear than we would like.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This issue refers to a requirements table we have removed.
</p>
<p>
The issue might now relate to 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators] p5.
However, the rationale in the issue already recognises that the
<tt>difference_type</tt> must be signed, so this really looks NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with Alisdair's observations.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Need to look at again without concepts.
</p>
<p>
There was a question about this phrase in the discussion: "the
expression -n must be valid, which is not the case for unsigned types."
If n is an object ofthe iterator difference_type (eg ptrdiff_t), then it
is never unsigned.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The group reviewed the wording in the draft and agreed that n is of
difference type, the difference type is signed, and the current wording
is correct.  Moved to NAD.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
To remove this limitation, I suggest to change the
operational semantics for this column to:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>    { Distance m = n;
      if (m &gt;= 0)
        while (m--) --r;
      else
        while (m++) ++r;
      return r; }
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="459"></a>459. Requirement for widening in stage 2 is overspecification</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2004-03-16 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>When parsing strings of wide-character digits, the standard
  requires the library to widen narrow-character "atoms" and compare
  the widened atoms against the characters that are being parsed.
  Simply narrowing the wide characters would be far simpler, and
  probably more efficient.  The two choices are equivalent except in
  convoluted test cases, and many implementations already ignore the
  standard and use narrow instead of widen.</p>

<p>
First, I disagree that using narrow() instead of widen() would
necessarily have unfortunate performance implications. A possible
implementation of narrow() that allows num_get to be implemented
in a much simpler and arguably comparably efficient way as calling
widen() allows, i.e. without making a virtual call to do_narrow every
time, is as follows:
</p>

<pre>  inline char ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt;::narrow (wchar_t wc, char dflt) const
  {
      const unsigned wi = unsigned (wc);

      if (wi &gt; UCHAR_MAX)
          return typeid (*this) == typeid (ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt;) ?
                 dflt : do_narrow (wc, dflt);

      if (narrow_ [wi] &lt; 0) {
         const char nc = do_narrow (wc, dflt);
         if (nc == dflt)
             return dflt;
         narrow_ [wi] = nc;
      }

      return char (narrow_ [wi]);
  }
</pre>

<p>
Second, I don't think the change proposed in the issue (i.e., to use
narrow() instead of widen() during Stage 2) would be at all
drastic. Existing implementations with the exception of libstdc++
currently already use narrow() so the impact of the change on programs
would presumably be isolated to just a single implementation. Further,
since narrow() is not required to translate alternate wide digit
representations such as those mentioned in issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#303">303</a> to
their narrow equivalents (i.e., the portable source characters '0'
through '9'), the change does not necessarily imply that these
alternate digits would be treated as ordinary digits and accepted as
part of numbers during parsing. In fact, the requirement in 22.4.1.1.2 [locale.ctype.virtuals], p13 forbids narrow() to translate an alternate
digit character, wc, to an ordinary digit in the basic source
character set unless the expression
(ctype&lt;charT&gt;::is(ctype_base::digit, wc) == true) holds. This in
turn is prohibited by the C standard (7.25.2.1.5, 7.25.2.1.5, and
5.2.1, respectively) for charT of either char or wchar_t.
</p>

<p><i>[Sydney: To a large extent this is a nonproblem. As long as
you're only trafficking in char and wchar_t we're only dealing with a
stable character set, so you don't really need either 'widen' or
'narrow': can just use literals. Finally, it's not even clear whether
widen-vs-narrow is the right question; arguably we should be using
codecvt instead.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD. The standard is clear enough as written.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Change stage 2 so that implementations are permitted to use either
technique to perform the comparison:</p>
<ol>
  <li> call widen on the atoms and compare (either by using
      operator== or char_traits&lt;charT&gt;::eq) the input with
      the widened atoms, or</li>
  <li> call narrow on the input and compare the narrow input
      with the atoms</li>
  <li> do (1) or (2) only if charT is not char or wchar_t,
      respectively; i.e., avoid calling widen or narrow
      if it the source and destination types are the same</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="462"></a>462. Destroying objects with static storage duration</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 3.6.3 [basic.start.term], 18.4 [cstdint] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
3.6.3 Termination spells out in detail the interleaving of static
destructor calls and calls to functions registered with atexit. To
match this behavior requires intimate cooperation between the code
that calls destructors and the exit/atexit machinery. The former
is tied tightly to the compiler; the latter is a primitive mechanism
inherited from C that traditionally has nothing to do with static
construction and destruction. The benefits of intermixing destructor
calls with atexit handler calls is questionable at best, and <i>very</i>
difficult to get right, particularly when mixing third-party C++
libraries with different third-party C++ compilers and C libraries
supplied by still other parties.
</p>

<p>
I believe the right thing to do is defer all static destruction
until after all atexit handlers are called. This is a change in
behavior, but one that is likely visible only to perverse test
suites. At the very least, we should <i>permit</i> deferred destruction
even if we don't require it.
</p>

<p><i>[If this is to be changed, it should probably be changed by CWG.
  At this point, however, the LWG is leaning toward NAD.  Implementing
  what the standard says is hard work, but it's not impossible and
  most vendors went through that pain years ago.  Changing this
  behavior would be a user-visible change, and would break at least
  one real application.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia:  Send to core with our recommendation that we should permit deferred
destruction but not require it.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Howard:  The course of action recommended in Batavia would undo LWG
issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#3">3</a> and break current code implementing the "phoenix
singleton". Search the net for "phoenix singleton atexit" to get a feel
for the size of the adverse impact this change would have.  Below is
sample code which implements the phoenix singleton and would break if
<tt>atexit</tt> is changed in this way:
]</i></p>


<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;cstdlib&gt;
#include &lt;iostream&gt;
#include &lt;type_traits&gt;
#include &lt;new&gt;

class A
{
    bool alive_;
    A(const A&amp;);
    A&amp; operator=(const A&amp;);
public:
    A() : alive_(true) {std::cout &lt;&lt; "A()\n";}
    ~A() {alive_ = false; std::cout &lt;&lt; "~A()\n";}
    void use()
    {
        if (alive_)
            std::cout &lt;&lt; "A is alive\n";
        else
            std::cout &lt;&lt; "A is dead\n";
    }
};

void deallocate_resource();

// This is the phoenix singleton pattern
A&amp; get_resource(bool create = true)
{
    static std::aligned_storage&lt;sizeof(A), std::alignment_of&lt;A&gt;::value&gt;::type buf;
    static A* a;
    if (create)
    {
        if (a != (A*)&amp;buf)
        {
            a = ::new (&amp;buf) A;
            std::atexit(deallocate_resource);
        }
    }
    else
    {
        a-&gt;~A();
        a = (A*)&amp;buf + 1;
    }
    return *a;
}

void deallocate_resource()
{
    get_resource(false);
}

void use_A(const char* message)
{
    A&amp; a = get_resource();
    std::cout &lt;&lt; "Using A " &lt;&lt; message &lt;&lt; "\n";
    a.use();
}

struct B
{
    ~B() {use_A("from ~B()");}
};

B b;

int main()
{
    use_A("from main()");
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The correct output is:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>A()
Using A from main()
A is alive
~A()
A()
Using A from ~B()
A is alive
~A()
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Bellevue: Confirmed no interaction with <tt>quick_exit</tt>.
Strong feeling against mandating the change. Leaning towards NAD rather than permitting the change,
as this would make common implementations of pheonix-singleton pattern implementation defined, as noted by Howard.
Bill agrees issue is no longer serious, and accepts NAD.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="463"></a>463. auto_ptr usability 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Rani Sharoni <b>Opened:</b> 2003-12-07 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
TC1 CWG DR #84 effectively made the template&lt;class Y&gt; operator auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;()
member of auto_ptr (20.4.5.3/4) obsolete.
</p>

<p>
The sole purpose of this obsolete conversion member is to enable copy
initialization base from r-value derived (or any convertible types like
cv-types) case:
</p>
<pre>#include &lt;memory&gt;
using std::auto_ptr;

struct B {};
struct D : B {};

auto_ptr&lt;D&gt; source();
int sink(auto_ptr&lt;B&gt;);
int x1 = sink( source() ); // #1 EDG - no suitable copy constructor
</pre>

<p>
The excellent analysis of conversion operations that was given in the final
auto_ptr proposal
(http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/1997/N1128.pdf)
explicitly specifies this case analysis (case 4). DR #84 makes the analysis
wrong and actually comes to forbid the loophole that was exploited by the
auto_ptr designers.
</p>

<p>
I didn't encounter any compliant compiler (e.g. EDG, GCC, BCC and VC) that
ever allowed this case. This is probably because it requires 3 user defined
conversions and in fact current compilers conform to DR #84.
</p>

<p>
I was surprised to discover that the obsolete conversion member actually has
negative impact of the copy initialization base from l-value derived
case:</p>
<pre>auto_ptr&lt;D&gt; dp;
int x2 = sink(dp); // #2 EDG - more than one user-defined conversion applies
</pre>

<p>
I'm sure that the original intention was allowing this initialization using
the template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;&amp; a) constructor (20.4.5.1/4) but
since in this copy initialization it's merely user defined conversion (UDC)
and the obsolete conversion member is UDC with the same rank (for the early
overloading stage) there is an ambiguity between them.
</p>

<p>
Removing the obsolete member will have impact on code that explicitly
invokes it:
</p>
<pre>int y = sink(source().operator auto_ptr&lt;B&gt;());
</pre>

<p>
IMHO no one ever wrote such awkward code and the reasonable workaround for
#1 is:
</p>
<pre>int y = sink( auto_ptr&lt;B&gt;(source()) );
</pre>

<p>
I was even more surprised to find out that after removing the obsolete
conversion member the initialization was still ill-formed:
int x3 = sink(dp); // #3 EDG - no suitable copy constructor
</p>

<p>
This copy initialization semantically requires copy constructor which means
that both template conversion constructor and the auto_ptr_ref conversion
member (20.4.5.3/3) are required which is what was explicitly forbidden in
DR #84. This is a bit amusing case in which removing ambiguity results with
no candidates.
</p>

<p>
I also found exception safety issue with auto_ptr related to auto_ptr_ref:
</p>
<pre>int f(auto_ptr&lt;B&gt;, std::string);
auto_ptr&lt;B&gt; source2();

// string constructor throws while auto_ptr_ref
// "holds" the pointer
int x4 = f(source2(), "xyz"); // #4
</pre>

<p>
The theoretic execution sequence that will cause a leak:
</p>
<ol>
<li>call auto_ptr&lt;B&gt;::operator auto_ptr_ref&lt;B&gt;()</li>
<li>call string::string(char const*) and throw</li>
</ol>

<p>
According to 20.4.5.3/3 and 20.4.5/2 the auto_ptr_ref conversion member
returns auto_ptr_ref&lt;Y&gt; that holds *this and this is another defect since
the type of *this is auto_ptr&lt;X&gt; where X might be different from Y. Several
library vendors (e.g. SGI) implement auto_ptr_ref&lt;Y&gt; with Y* as member which
is much more reasonable. Other vendor implemented auto_ptr_ref as
defectively required and it results with awkward and catastrophic code:
int oops = sink(auto_ptr&lt;B&gt;(source())); // warning recursive on all control
paths
</p>

<p>
Dave Abrahams noticed that there is no specification saying that
auto_ptr_ref copy constructor can't throw.
</p>

<p>
My proposal comes to solve all the above issues and significantly simplify
auto_ptr implementation. One of the fundamental requirements from auto_ptr
is that it can be constructed in an intuitive manner (i.e. like ordinary
pointers) but with strict ownership semantics which yield that source
auto_ptr in initialization must be non-const. My idea is to add additional
constructor template with sole propose to generate ill-formed, diagnostic
required, instance for const auto_ptr arguments during instantiation of
declaration. This special constructor will not be instantiated for other
types which is achievable using 14.8.2/2 (SFINAE). Having this constructor
in hand makes the constructor template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp;)
legitimate since the actual argument can't be const yet non const r-value
are acceptable.
</p>

<p>
This implementation technique makes the "private auxiliary class"
auto_ptr_ref obsolete and I found out that modern C++ compilers (e.g. EDG,
GCC and VC) consume the new implementation as expected and allow all
intuitive initialization and assignment cases while rejecting illegal cases
that involve const auto_ptr arguments.
</p>

<p>The proposed auto_ptr interface:</p>

<pre>namespace std {
    template&lt;class X&gt; class auto_ptr {
    public:
        typedef X element_type;

        // 20.4.5.1 construct/copy/destroy:
        explicit auto_ptr(X* p=0) throw();
        auto_ptr(auto_ptr&amp;) throw();
        template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp;) throw();
        auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&amp;) throw();
        template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;) throw();
        ~auto_ptr() throw();

        // 20.4.5.2 members:
        X&amp; operator*() const throw();
        X* operator-&gt;() const throw();
        X* get() const throw();
        X* release() throw();
        void reset(X* p=0) throw();

    private:
        template&lt;class U&gt;
        auto_ptr(U&amp; rhs, typename
unspecified_error_on_const_auto_ptr&lt;U&gt;::type = 0);
    };
}
</pre>

<p>
One compliant technique to implement the unspecified_error_on_const_auto_ptr
helper class is using additional private auto_ptr member class template like
the following:
</p>
<pre>template&lt;typename T&gt; struct unspecified_error_on_const_auto_ptr;

template&lt;typename T&gt;
struct unspecified_error_on_const_auto_ptr&lt;auto_ptr&lt;T&gt; const&gt;
{ typedef typename auto_ptr&lt;T&gt;::const_auto_ptr_is_not_allowed type; };
</pre>

<p>
There are other techniques to implement this helper class that might work
better for different compliers (i.e. better diagnostics) and therefore I
suggest defining its semantic behavior without mandating any specific
implementation. IMO, and I didn't found any compiler that thinks otherwise,
14.7.1/5 doesn't theoretically defeat the suggested technique but I suggest
verifying this with core language experts.
</p>

<p><b>Further changes in standard text:</b></p>
<p>Remove section 20.4.5.3</p>

<p>Change 20.4.5/2 to read something like:
Initializing auto_ptr&lt;X&gt; from const auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt; will result with unspecified
ill-formed declaration that will require unspecified diagnostic.</p>

<p>Change 20.4.5.1/4,5,6 to read:</p>

<pre>template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp; a) throw();</pre>
<p> 4 Requires: Y* can be implicitly converted to X*.</p>
<p> 5 Effects: Calls const_cast&lt;auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;&amp;&gt;(a).release().</p>
<p> 6 Postconditions: *this holds the pointer returned from a.release().</p>

<p>Change 20.4.5.1/10</p>
<pre>template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt; a) throw();
</pre>
<p>
10 Requires: Y* can be implicitly converted to X*. The expression delete
get() is well formed.
</p>

<p>LWG TC DR #127 is obsolete.</p>

<p>
Notice that the copy constructor and copy assignment operator should remain
as before and accept non-const auto_ptr&amp; since they have effect on the form
of the implicitly declared copy constructor and copy assignment operator of
class that contains auto_ptr as member per 12.8/5,10:
</p>
<pre>struct X {
    // implicit X(X&amp;)
    // implicit X&amp; operator=(X&amp;)
    auto_ptr&lt;D&gt; aptr_;
};
</pre>

<p>
In most cases this indicates about sloppy programming but preserves the
current auto_ptr behavior.
</p>

<p>
Dave Abrahams encouraged me to suggest fallback implementation in case that
my suggestion that involves removing of auto_ptr_ref will not be accepted.
In this case removing the obsolete conversion member to auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt; and
20.4.5.3/4,5 is still required in order to eliminate ambiguity in legal
cases. The two constructors that I suggested will co exist with the current
members but will make auto_ptr_ref obsolete in initialization contexts.
auto_ptr_ref will be effective in assignment contexts as suggested in DR
#127 and I can't see any serious exception safety issues in those cases
(although it's possible to synthesize such). auto_ptr_ref&lt;X&gt; semantics will
have to be revised to say that it strictly holds pointer of type X and not
reference to an auto_ptr for the favor of cases in which auto_ptr_ref&lt;Y&gt; is
constructed from auto_ptr&lt;X&gt; in which X is different from Y (i.e. assignment
from r-value derived to base).
</p>

<p><i>[Redmond: punt for the moment. We haven't decided yet whether we
  want to fix auto_ptr for C++-0x, or remove it and replace it with
  move_ptr and unique_ptr.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Oxford 2007: Recommend NAD.  We're just going to deprecate it.  It still works for simple use cases
and people know how to deal with it.  Going forward <tt>unique_ptr</tt> is the recommended
tool.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2007-11-09: Reopened at the request of David Abrahams, Alisdair Meredith and Gabriel Dos Reis.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This is a complicated issue, so we agreed to defer discussion until
later in the week so that interested parties can read up on it.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
209-10-04 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I suggest to close this issue as NAD. The reasons are two-fold: First, the
suggested proposed resolution uses no longer appropriate language means
to solve this issue, which has the effect that the recommended resolution is
another - but better - form of hack. Second, either following the suggested
resolution or the now more natural alternative via the added member set
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;&amp;&amp;) throw();
template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;&amp;&amp;) throw();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
would still have a non-zero probability to break user-code that actively
references <tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt>. This risk seems to indicate that a
decision which would not touch the current spec of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> at
all (but deprecating it) and instead recommending to use
<tt>unique_ptr</tt> for new code instead might have the best
cost-benefit ratio. IMO the current solution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1100">1100</a> can
be considered as an active user-support for this transition.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD. Alisdair will open a new issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1247">1247</a>) with
proposed wording to handle <tt>auto_ptr_ref</tt>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in D.12.1 [auto.ptr]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std { 
  <del>template &lt;class Y&gt; struct auto_ptr_ref {};</del>

  <ins>// exposition only</ins>
  <ins>template &lt;class T&gt; struct constant_object;</ins>

  <ins>// exposition only</ins>
  <ins>template &lt;class T&gt;</ins>
  <ins>struct cannot_transfer_ownership_from</ins>
    <ins>: constant_object&lt;T&gt; {};</ins>

  template &lt;class X&gt; class auto_ptr { 
  public: 
    typedef X element_type; 

    // D.9.1.1 construct/copy/destroy: 
    explicit auto_ptr(X* p =0) throw(); 
    auto_ptr(auto_ptr&amp;) throw(); 
    template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;<ins> const</ins>&amp;) throw(); 
    auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&amp;) throw(); 
    template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;<del>&amp;</del>) throw();
    <del>auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr_ref&lt;X&gt; r) throw();</del>
    ~auto_ptr() throw(); 

    // D.9.1.2 members: 
    X&amp; operator*() const throw();
    X* operator-&gt;() const throw();
    X* get() const throw();
    X* release() throw();
    void reset(X* p =0) throw();

    <del>// D.9.1.3 conversions:</del>
    <del>auto_ptr(auto_ptr_ref&lt;X&gt;) throw();</del>
    <del>template&lt;class Y&gt; operator auto_ptr_ref&lt;Y&gt;() throw();</del>
    <del>template&lt;class Y&gt; operator auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;() throw();</del>

    <ins>// exposition only</ins>
    <ins>template&lt;class U&gt;</ins>
    <ins>auto_ptr(U&amp; rhs, typename cannot_transfer_ownership_from&lt;U&gt;::error = 0);</ins>
  }; 

  template &lt;&gt; class auto_ptr&lt;void&gt; 
  { 
  public: 
    typedef void element_type; 
  }; 

}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Remove D.12.1.3 [auto.ptr.conv].
</p>

<p>
Change D.12.1 [auto.ptr], p3:
</p>

<blockquote>
The <tt>auto_ptr</tt> provides a semantics of strict ownership. An
<tt>auto_ptr</tt> owns the object it holds a pointer to. Copying an
<tt>auto_ptr</tt> copies the pointer and transfers ownership to the
destination. If more than one <tt>auto_ptr</tt> owns the same object at
the same time the behavior of the program is undefined. <ins>Templates
<tt>constant_object</tt> and <tt>cannot_transfer_ownership_from</tt>,
and the final constructor of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> are for exposition only.
For any types <tt>X</tt> and <tt>Y</tt>, initializing
<tt>auto_ptr&lt;X&gt;</tt> from <tt>const auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;</tt> is
ill-formed, diagnostic required.</ins> [<i>Note:</i> The uses of
<tt>auto_ptr</tt> include providing temporary exception-safety for
dynamically allocated memory, passing ownership of dynamically allocated
memory to a function, and returning dynamically allocated memory from a
function. <tt>auto_ptr</tt> does not meet the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>
and <tt>Assignable</tt> requirements for Standard Library container
elements and thus instantiating a Standard Library container with an
<tt>auto_ptr</tt> results in undefined behavior. <i>-- end note</i>]
</blockquote>

<p>
Change D.12.1.1 [auto.ptr.cons], p5:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;<ins> const</ins>&amp; a) throw();
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>Y*</tt> can be implicitly converted to <tt>X*</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Calls <ins><tt>const_cast&lt;auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;&amp;&gt;(</tt></ins><tt>a</tt><ins><tt>)</tt></ins><tt>.release()</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>*this</tt> holds the pointer returned from <tt>a.release()</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change D.12.1.1 [auto.ptr.cons], p10:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class Y&gt; auto_ptr&amp; operator=(auto_ptr&lt;Y&gt;<del>&amp;</del> a) throw();
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>Y*</tt> can be implicitly converted to <tt>X*</tt>.
The expression <tt>delete get()</tt> is well formed.
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Calls <tt>reset(a.release())</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="466"></a>466. basic_string ctor should prevent null pointer error</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Frey <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-10 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Today, my colleagues and me wasted a lot of time. After some time, I
found the problem. It could be reduced to the following short example:
</p>

<pre>  #include &lt;string&gt;
  int main() { std::string( 0 ); }
</pre>

<p>The problem is that the tested compilers (GCC 2.95.2, GCC 3.3.1 and
Comeau online) compile the above without errors or warnings! The
programs (at least for the GCC) resulted in a SEGV.</p>

<p>I know that the standard explicitly states that the ctor of string
requires a char* which is not zero. STLs could easily detect the above
case with a private ctor for basic_string which takes a single 'int'
argument. This would catch the above code at compile time and would not
ambiguate any other legal ctors.</p>

<p><i>[Redmond: No great enthusiasm for doing this.  If we do,
  however, we want to do it for all places that take <tt>charT*</tt>
  pointers, not just the single-argument constructor.  The other
  question is whether we want to catch this at compile time (in which
  case we catch the error of a literal 0, but not an expression whose
  value is a null pointer), at run time, or both.
  Recommend NAD.  Relegate this functionality to debugging implementations.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Post Summit: Alisdair requests this be re-opened as several new language facilities are
designed to solve exactly this kind of problem.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We are unable to achieve consensus on an approach to a resolution.
There is some sentiment for treating this as a QOI matter.
It is also possible
that when <tt>string</tt> is brought into the concepts world,
this issue might be addressed in that context.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We considered three options:
</p>

<ul>
<li>The proposed resolution.</li>
<li>NAD</li>
<li>Interpret a null pointer as the empty string.</li>
</ul>

<p>
The consensus was NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to the synopsis in 21.4 [basic.string]
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>basic_string( nullptr_t ) = delete;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="470"></a>470. accessing containers from their elements' special functions</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The standard doesn't prohibit the destructors (or any other special
functions) of containers' elements invoked from a member function
of the container from "recursively" calling the same (or any other)
member function on the same container object, potentially while the
container is in an intermediate state, or even changing the state
of the container object while it is being modified. This may result
in some surprising (i.e., undefined) behavior.
</p>

<p>Read email thread starting with c++std-lib-13637 for more.</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>Add to Container Requirements the following new paragraph:</p>

<pre>    Unless otherwise specified, the behavior of a program that
    invokes a container member function f from a member function
    g of the container's value_type on a container object c that
    called g from its mutating member function h, is undefined.
    I.e., if v is an element of c, directly or indirectly calling
    c.h() from v.g() called from c.f(), is undefined.
</pre>

<p><i>[Redmond: This is a real issue, but it's probably a clause 17
  issue, not clause 23.  We get the same issue, for example, if we
  try to destroy a stream from one of the stream's callback functions.]</i></p>

  


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.  We agree this is an issue, but not a defect.
We believe that there is no wording we can put in the standard
that will cover all cases without introducing unfortunate
corner cases.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="472"></a>472. Missing "Returns" clause in std::equal_range</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Prateek R Karandikar <b>Opened:</b> 2004-06-30 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#270">270</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There is no "Returns:" clause for std::equal_range, which returns non-void.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Fixed as part of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#270">270</a>.</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="476"></a>476. Forward Iterator implied mutability</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>24.1/3 says:</p>
<blockquote><p>
  Forward iterators satisfy all the requirements of the input and
  output iterators and can be used whenever either kind is specified
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The problem is that satisfying the requirements of output iterator
means that you can always assign *something* into the result of
dereferencing it.  That makes almost all non-mutable forward
iterators non-conforming.  I think we need to sever the refinement
relationship between forward iterator and output iterator.
</p>

<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#200">200</a>.  But this is not a dup.</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Yes, 24.1/3 does say that. But it's introductory material. The
precise specification is in 24.1.3, and the requrements table there is
right.  We don't need to fine-tune introductory wording.  (Especially
since this wording is likely to be changed as part of the iterator
overhaul.)</p> 





<hr>
<h3><a name="477"></a>477. Operator-&gt; for const forward 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#Dup">Dup</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</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-&gt;m        U&amp; if X is mutable, (*a).m       pre: (*a).m is well-defined.
              otherwise const U&amp;

  r-&gt;m        U&amp;                  (*r).m       pre: (*r).m is well-defined.
</pre>

<p>
The first line is exactly right.  The second line is wrong.  Basically
it implies that the const-ness of the iterator affects the const-ness
of referenced members.  But 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&amp;, 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>AFAICT if we need the second line at all, it should read the same
as the first line.</p>

<p>Related issue: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</a></p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG agrees that this is a real problem.  Marked as a DUP
  because the LWG chose to adopt the solution proposed in
  <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#478">478</a>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="479"></a>479. Container requirements and placement new</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 2004-08-01 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#580">580</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Nothing in the standard appears to make this program ill-formed:</p>

<pre>  struct C {
    void* operator new( size_t s ) { return ::operator new( s ); }
    // NOTE: this hides in-place and nothrow new
  };

  int main() {
    vector&lt;C&gt; v;
    v.push_back( C() );
  }
</pre>

<p>Is that intentional?  We should clarify whether or not we intended
  to require containers to support types that define their own special
  versions of <tt>operator new</tt>.</p>

<p><i>[
Lillehammer: A container will definitely never use this overridden
operator new, but whether it will fail to compile is unclear from the
standard.  Are containers supposed to use qualified or unqualified
placement new?  20.4.1.1 is somewhat relevant, but the standard
doesn't make it completely clear whether containers have to use
Allocator::construct(). If containers don't use it, the details of how
containers use placement new are unspecified. That is the real bug,
but it needs to be fixed as part of the allocator overhaul.  Weak
support that the eventual solution should make this code well formed.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="480"></a>480. unary_function and binary_function should have protected nonvirtual destructors</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2004-08-19 <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#base">issues</a> in [base].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>The classes std::unary_function and std::binary_function are both
designed to be inherited from but contain no virtual functions.  This
makes it too easy for a novice programmer to write code like
binary_function&lt;int, int, int&gt; *p = new plus&lt;int&gt;; delete p;</p>

<p>There are two common ways to prevent this source of undefined
behavior: give the base class a public virtual destructor, or give it
a protected nonvirtual destructor.  Since unary_function and
binary_function have no other virtual functions, (note in particular
the absence of an operator()() ), it would cost too much to give them
public virtual destructors.  Therefore, they should be given protected
nonvirtual destructors.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Change Paragraph 20.3.1 of the Standard from</p>
<pre>    template &lt;class Arg, class Result&gt;
    struct unary_function {
        typedef Arg argument_type;
        typedef Result result_type;
    };

    template &lt;class Arg1, class Arg2, class Result&gt;
    struct binary_function {
        typedef Arg1 first_argument_type;
        typedef Arg2 second_argument_type;
        typedef Result result_type;
    };
</pre>

<p>to</p>
<pre>    template &lt;class Arg, class Result&gt;
        struct unary_function {
        typedef Arg argument_type;
        typedef Result result_type;
    protected:
        ~unary_function() {}
    };

    template &lt;class Arg1, class Arg2, class Result&gt;
    struct binary_function {
        typedef Arg1 first_argument_type;
        typedef Arg2 second_argument_type;
        typedef Result result_type;
    protected:
        ~binary_function() {}
    };
</pre>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG doesn't believe the existing definition causes anybody any
  concrete harm.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="481"></a>481. unique's effects on the range [result, last)</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Andrew Koenig <b>Opened:</b> 2004-08-30 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The standard says that unique(first, last) "eliminates all but the
first element from every consecutive group of equal elements" in
[first, last) and returns "the end of the resulting range".  So a
postcondition is that [first, result) is the same as the old [first,
last) except that duplicates have been eliminated.
</p>

<p>What postconditions are there on the range [result, last)?  One
  might argue that the standard says nothing about those values, so
  they can be anything.  One might also argue that the standard
  doesn't permit those values to be changed, so they must not be.
  Should the standard say something explicit one way or the other?</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>We don't want to make many guarantees about what's in [result,
end). Maybe we aren't being quite explicit enough about not being
explicit, but it's hard to think that's a major problem.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="483"></a>483. Heterogeneous equality and EqualityComparable</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.2 [alg.nonmodifying], 25.3 [alg.modifying.operations] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2004-09-20 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#283">283</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>c++std-lib-14262</p>

<p>[lib.alg.find] requires T to be EqualityComparable:</p>

<pre>template &lt;class InputIterator, class T&gt;
   InputIterator find(InputIterator first, InputIterator last,
                      const T&amp; value);
</pre>

<p>
However the condition being tested, as specified in the Effects
clause, is actually *i == value, where i is an InputIterator.
</p>

<p>
The two clauses are in agreement only if the type of *i is T, but this
isn't necessarily the case. *i may have a heterogeneous comparison
operator that takes a T, or a T may be convertible to the type of *i.
</p>

<p>Further discussion (c++std-lib-14264): this problem affects a
  number of algorithsm in clause 25, not just <tt>find</tt>.  We
  should try to resolve this problem everywhere it appears.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>[lib.alg.find]:</p>
<blockquote><p>
   Remove [lib.alg.find]/1.
</p></blockquote>

<p>[lib.alg.count]:</p>
<blockquote><p>
   Remove [lib.alg.count]/1.
</p></blockquote>

<p>[lib.alg.search]:</p>
<blockquote><p>
   Remove "Type T is EqualityComparable (20.1.1), " from [lib.alg.search]/4.
</p></blockquote>

<p>[lib.alg.replace]:</p>

<blockquote>
   <p>
   Remove [lib.alg.replace]/1.
   Replace [lb.alg.replace]/2 with:
   </p>

       <blockquote><p>
       For every iterator i in the range [first, last) for which *i == value
       or pred(*i) holds perform *i = new_value.
       </p></blockquote>

   <p>
   Remove the first sentence of /4.
   Replace the beginning of /5 with:
   </p>

       <blockquote><p>
       For every iterator i in the range [result, result + (last -
       first)), assign to *i either...
       </p></blockquote>

   <p>(Note the defect here, current text says assign to i, not *i).</p>
</blockquote>

<p>[lib.alg.fill]:</p>

<blockquote>
   <p>
   Remove "Type T is Assignable (23.1), " from /1.
   Replace /2 with:
   </p>

       <blockquote><p>
       For every iterator i in the range [first, last) or [first, first + n),
       perform *i = value.
       </p></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>[lib.alg.remove]:</p>
<blockquote><p>
   Remove /1.
   Remove the first sentence of /6.
</p></blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Duplicate of (a subset of) issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#283">283</a>.</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="484"></a>484. Convertible to T</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2004-09-16 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>From comp.std.c++:</p>

<p>
I note that given an input iterator a for type T, 
then *a only has to be "convertable to T", not actually of type T.
</p>

<p>Firstly, I can't seem to find an exact definition of "convertable to T". 
While I assume it is the obvious definition (an implicit conversion), I 
can't find an exact definition. Is there one?</p>

<p>Slightly more worryingly, there doesn't seem to be any restriction on 
the this type, other than it is "convertable to T". Consider two input 
iterators a and b. I would personally assume that most people would 
expect *a==*b would perform T(*a)==T(*b), however it doesn't seem that 
the standard requires that, and that whatever type *a is (call it U) 
could have == defined on it with totally different symantics and still 
be a valid inputer iterator.</p>

<p>Is this a correct reading? When using input iterators should I write 
T(*a) all over the place to be sure that the object i'm using is the 
class I expect?</p>

<p>This is especially a nuisance for operations that are defined to be
  "convertible to bool".  (This is probably allowed so that
  implementations could return say an int and avoid an unnessary
  conversion. However all implementations I have seen simply return a
  bool anyway.  Typical implemtations of STL algorithms just write
  things like <tt>while(a!=b &amp;&amp; *a!=0)</tt>.  But strictly
  speaking, there are lots of types that are convertible to T but
  that also overload the appropriate operators so this doesn't behave
  as expected.</p>

<p>If we want to make code like this legal (which most people seem to
  expect), then we'll need to tighten up what we mean by "convertible
  to T".</p>

<p><i>[Lillehammer: The first part is NAD, since "convertible" is
 well-defined in core. The second part is basically about pathological
 overloads. It's a minor problem but a real one. So leave open for
 now, hope we solve it as part of iterator redesign.]</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>
Mark as NAD Future. We agree there's an issue, but there is no
proposed solution at this time and this will be solved by concepts in
the future.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></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/n2758.pdf">N2758</a>.
</blockquote>







<hr>
<h3><a name="485"></a>485. output iterator insufficiently constrained</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2004-10-13 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The note on 24.1.2 Output iterators insufficiently limits what can be
performed on output iterators. While it requires that each iterator is
progressed through only once and that each iterator is written to only
once, it does not require the following things:</p>

<p>Note: Here it is assumed that x is an output iterator of type X which
has not yet been assigned to.</p>

<p>a) That each value of the output iterator is written to:
The standard allows:
++x; ++x; ++x;
</p>

<p>
b) That assignments to the output iterator are made in order
X a(x); ++a; *a=1; *x=2; is allowed
</p>

<p>
c) Chains of output iterators cannot be constructed:
X a(x); ++a; X b(a); ++b; X c(b); ++c; is allowed, and under the current
wording (I believe) x,a,b,c could be written to in any order.
</p>

<p>I do not believe this was the intension of the standard?</p>
<p><i>[Lillehammer: Real issue.  There are lots of constraints we
  intended but didn't specify.  Should be solved as part of iterator
  redesign.]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Bill provided wording according to consensus.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-21 Alisdair requests change from Review to Open.  See thread starting
with c++std-lib-24459 for discussion.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Modified wording.  Set to Review.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Ready after looking at again in a larger group in Santa Cruz.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3066.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change Table 101 � Output iterator requirements in 24.2.4 [output.iterators]:
</p>
<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<caption>Table 101 � Output iterator requirements</caption>
<tbody><tr>
<th>Expression</th>
<th>Return type</th>
<th>Operational semantics</th>
<th>Assertion/note pre-/post-condition</th>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>X(a)</tt>
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>
<tt>a = t</tt> is equivalent to <tt>X(a) = t</tt>. note: a destructor is assumed.
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>X u(a);</tt><br>
<tt>X u = a;</tt>
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>*r = o</tt>
</td>
<td>
result is not used
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>
<ins>
Post: <tt>r</tt> is not required to be dereferenceable.  <tt>r</tt> is incrementable.
</ins>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>++r</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>X&amp;</tt>
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>
<tt>&amp;r == &amp;++r</tt>
<ins>
Post: <tt>r</tt> is dereferenceable, unless otherwise specified.  <tt>r</tt> is not required to be incrementable.
</ins>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>r++</tt>
</td>
<td>
convertible to <tt>const X&amp;</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>{X tmp = r;<br>++r;<br>return tmp;}</tt>
</td>
<td>
<ins>
Post: <tt>r</tt> is dereferenceable, unless otherwise specified. <tt>r</tt> is not required to be incrementable.
</ins>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>*r++ = o;</tt>
</td>
<td>
result is not used
</td>
<td>
&nbsp;
</td>
<td>

</td>
</tr>

</tbody></table>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="486"></a>486. min/max CopyConstructible requirement is too strict</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2004-10-13 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#281">281</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>A straightforward implementation of these algorithms does not need to
copy T.</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>drop the the words "and CopyConstructible" from paragraphs 1 and 4</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="487"></a>487. Allocator::construct is too limiting</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dhruv Matani <b>Opened:</b> 2004-10-17 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The standard's version of allocator::construct(pointer,
const_reference) severely limits what you can construct using this
function.  Say you can construct a socket from a file descriptor. Now,
using this syntax, I first have to manually construct a socket from
the fd, and then pass the constructed socket to the construct()
function so it will just to an uninitialized copy of the socket I
manually constructed. Now it may not always be possible to copy
construct a socket eh! So, I feel that the changes should go in the
allocator::construct(), making it:
</p>
<pre>    template&lt;typename T&gt;
    struct allocator{
      template&lt;typename T1&gt;
      void construct(pointer T1 const&amp; rt1);
    };
</pre>

<p>
Now, the ctor of the class T which matches the one that takes a T1 can
be called! Doesn't that sound great?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>NAD. STL uses copying all the time, and making it possible for
  allocators to construct noncopyable objects is useless in the
  absence of corresponding container changes. We might consider this
  as part of a larger redesign of STL.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="489"></a>489. std::remove / std::remove_if wrongly specified</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Mang <b>Opened:</b> 2004-12-12 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In Section 25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraphs 1 to 5 describe the
behavior of the mutating sequence operations std::remove and
std::remove_if. However, the wording does not reflect the intended
behavior [Note: See definition of intended behavior below] of these
algorithms, as it is known to the C++ community [1].
</p>



<p>1) Analysis of current wording:</p>


<p>25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraph 2:</p>

<p>Current wording says:
"Effects: Eliminates all the elements referred to by iterator i in the
range [first, last) for which the following corresponding conditions
hold: *i == value, pred(*i) != false."</p>

<p>
This sentences expresses specifically that all elements denoted by the
(original) range [first, last) for which the corresponding condition
hold will be eliminated. Since there is no formal definition of the term
"eliminate" provided, the meaning of "eliminate" in everyday language
implies that as postcondition, no element in the range denoted by
[first, last) will hold the corresponding condition on reiteration over
the range [first, last).
</p>

<p>
However, this is neither the intent [Note: See definition of intended
behavior below] nor a general possible approach. It can be easily proven
that if all elements of the original range[first, last) will hold the
condition, it is not possible to substitute them by an element for which
the condition will not hold.
</p>


<p>25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraph 3:</p>

<p>
Current wording says:
"Returns: The end of the resulting range."
</p>

<p>
The resulting range is not specified. In combination with 25.2.7
[lib.alg.remove], paragraph 2, the only reasonable interpretation of
this so-called resulting range is the range [first,last) - thus
returning always the ForwardIterator 'last' parameter.
</p>


<p>
25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraph 4:
</p>

<p>
Current wording says:
"Notes: Stable: the relative order of the elements that are not removed
is the same as their relative order in the original range"
</p>

<p>
This sentences makes use of the term "removed", which is neither
specified, nor used in a previous paragraph (which uses the term
"eliminate"), nor unamgiuously separated from the name of the algorithm.
</p>


<p>2) Description of intended behavior:</p>

<p>
For the rest of this Defect Report, it is assumed that the intended
behavior was that all elements of the range [first, last) which do not
hold the condition *i == value (std::remove) or  pred(*i) != false
(std::remove_if)], call them s-elements [Note: s...stay], will be placed
into a contiguous subrange of [first, last), denoted by the iterators
[first, return value). The number of elements in the resulting range
[first, return value) shall be equal to the number of s-elements in the
original range [first, last). The relative order of the elements in the
resulting subrange[first, return value) shall be the same as the
relative order of the corresponding elements in the original range. It
is undefined whether any elements in the resulting subrange [return
value, last) will hold the corresponding condition, or not.
</p>

<p>
All implementations known to the author of this Defect Report comply
with this intent. Since the intent  of the behavior (contrary to the
current wording) is also described in various utility references serving
the C++ community [1], it is not expected that fixing the paragraphs
will influence current code - unless the code relies on the behavior as
it is described by current wording and the implementation indeed
reflects the current wording, and not the intent.
</p>



<p>3) Proposed fixes:</p>


<p>Change 25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraph 2 to:</p>

<p>
"Effect: Places all the elements referred to by iterator i in the range
[first, last) for which the following corresponding conditions hold :
!(*i == value), pred(*i) == false into the subrange [first, k) of the
original range, where k shall denote a value of type ForwardIterator. It
is undefined whether any elements in the resulting subrange [k, last)
will hold the corresponding condition, or not."
</p>

<p>Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) "Places" has no special meaning, and the everyday language meaning
should fit.
b) The corresponding conditions were negated compared to the current
wording, becaue the new wording requires it.
c) The wording "of the original range" might be redundant, since any
subrange starting at 'first' and containing no more elements than the
original range is implicitly a subrange of the original range [first,
last).
d) The iterator k was introduced instead of "return value" in order to
avoid a cyclic dependency on 25.2.7/3. The wording ", where k shall
denote a value of type ForwardIterator" might be redundant, because it
follows implicitly by 25.2.7/3.
e) "Places" does, in the author's opinion, explicitly forbid duplicating
any element holding the corresponding condition in the original range
[first, last) within the resulting range [first, k). If there is doubt
this term might be not unambiguous regarding this, it is suggested that
k is specified more closely by the following wording: "k shall denote a
value of type ForwardIterator [Note: see d)] so that k - first is equal
to the number of elements in the original range [first, last) for which
the corresponding condition did hold". This could also be expressed as a
separate paragraph "Postcondition:"
f) The senctence "It is undefined whether any elements in the resulting
subrange [k, last) will hold the corresponding condition, or not." was
added consciously so the term "Places" does not imply if the original
range [first, last) contains n elements holding the corresponding
condition, the identical range[first, last) will also contain exactly n
elements holding the corresponding condition after application of the
algorithm.
</p>

<p>
Change 25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraph 3 to:

"Returns: The iterator k."
</p>

<p>
Change 25.2.7 [lib.alg.remove], paragraph 4 to:

"Notes: Stable: the relative order of the elements that are placed into
the subrange [first, return value) shall be the same as their relative
order was in the original range [first, last) prior to application of
the algorithm."
</p>

<p>
Comments to the new wording:
</p>

<p>
a) the wording "was ...  prior to application of the algorithm" is used
to explicitly distinguish the original range not only by means of
iterators, but also by a 'chronological' factor from the resulting range
[first, return value). It might be redundant.
</p>

<p>
[1]:
The wording of these references is not always unambiguous, and provided
examples partially contradict verbal description of the algorithms,
because the verbal description resembles the problematic wording of
ISO/IEC 14882:2003.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes that the standard is sufficiently clear, and that
  there is no evidence of any real-world confusion about this point.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="490"></a>490. std::unique wrongly specified</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Mang <b>Opened:</b> 2004-12-12 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In Section 25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraphs 1 to 3 describe the
behavior of the mutating sequence operation std::unique. However, the
wording does not reflect the intended behavior [Note: See definition of
intended behavior below] of these algorithms, as it is known to the C++
community [1].</p>



<p>1) Analysis of current wording:</p>


<p>25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 1:</p>

<p>
Current wording says:
"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>

<p>
This sentences expresses specifically that all elements denoted by the
(original) range [first, last) which are not but the first element from
a consecutive group of equal elements (where equality is defined as *i
== *(i - 1) or pred(*i, *(i - 1)) ! = false) [Note: See DR 202], call
them r-elements [Note: r...remove], will be eliminated. Since there is
no formal definition of the term "eliminate" provided, it is undefined
how this "elimination" takes place. But the meaning of "eliminate" in
everyday language seems to disallow explicitly that after application of
the algorithm, any r-element will remain at any position of the range
[first, last) [2].
</p>

<p>
Another defect in the current wording concerns the iterators used to
compare two elements for equality: The current wording contains the
expression "(i - 1)", which is not covered by 25/9 [Note: See DR
submitted by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic
expressions].
</p>


<p>
25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 2:
</p>
<p>Current wording says:
"Returns: The end of the resulting range."</p>

<p>
The resulting range is not specified. In combination with 25.2.8
[lib.alg.unique], paragraph 1, one reasonable interpretation (in the
author's opinion even the only possible interpretation) of this
so-called resulting range is the range [first, last) - thus returning
always the ForwardIterator 'last' parameter.
</p>

<p>2) Description of intended behavior:</p>

<p>
For the rest of this Defect Report, it is assumed that the intended
behavior was that all elements denoted by the original range [first,
last) which are the first element from a consecutive group of elements
for which the corresponding conditions: *(i-1) == *i (for the version of
unique without a predicate argument) or pred(*(i-1), *i) ! = false (for
the version of unique with a predicate argument) [Note: If such a group
of elements consists of only a single element, this is also considered
the first element] [Note: See resolutions of DR 202], call them
s-elements [Note: s...stay], will be placed into a contiguous subrange
of [first, last), denoted by the iterators [first, return value). The
number of elements in the resulting range [first, return value) shall be
equal to the number of s-elements in the original range [first, last).
Invalid iterator arithmetic expressions are expected to be resolved as
proposed in DR submitted by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator
arithmetic expressions. It is also assumed by the author that the
relative order of the elements in the resulting subrange [first, return
value) shall be the same as the relative order of the corresponding
elements (the s-elements) in the original range [Note: If this was not
intended behavior, the additional proposed paragraph about stable order
will certainly become obsolete].
Furthermore, the resolutions of DR 202 are partially considered.
</p>

<p>
All implementations known to the author of this Defect Report comply
with this intent [Note: Except possible effects of DR 202]. Since this
intent of the behavior (contrary to the current wording) is also
described in various utility references serving the C++ community [1],
it is not expected that fixing the paragraphs will influence current
code [Note: Except possible effects of DR 202] - unless the code relies
on the behavior as it is described by current wording and the
implementation indeed reflects the current wording, and not the intent.
</p>



<p>3) Proposed fixes:</p>

<p>
Change 25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 1 to:
</p>

<p>
"Effect: Places the first element from every consecutive group of
elements, referred to by the iterator i in the range [first, last), for
which the following conditions hold: *(i-1) == *i (for the version of
unique without a predicate argument) or pred(*(i -1), *i) != false (for
the version of unique with a predicate argument), into the subrange
[first, k) of the original range, where k shall denote a value of type
ForwardIterator."
</p>

<p>Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) The new wording was influenced by the resolutions of DR 202. If DR
202 is resolved in another way, the proposed wording need also
additional review.
b) "Places" has no special meaning, and the everyday language meaning
should fit.
c) The expression "(i - 1)" was left, but is expected that DR submitted
by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic expressions will
take this into account.
d) The wording "(for the version of unique without a predicate
argument)" and "(for the version of unique with a predicate argument)"
was added consciously for clarity and is in resemblence with current
23.2.2.4 [lib.list.ops], paragraph 19. It might be considered redundant.
e) The wording "of the original range" might be redundant, since any
subrange starting at first and containing no more elements than the
original range is implicitly a subrange of the original range [first,
last).
f) The iterator k was introduced instead of "return value" in order to
avoid a cyclic dependency on 25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 2. The
wording ", where k shall denote a value of type ForwardIterator" might
be redundant, because it follows implicitly by 25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique],
paragraph 2.
g) "Places" does, in the author's opinion, explicitly forbid duplicating
any s-element in the original range [first, last) within the resulting
range [first, k). If there is doubt this term might be not unambiguous
regarding this, it is suggested that k is specified more closely by the
following wording: "k shall denote a value of type ForwardIterator
[Note: See f)] so that k - first is equal to the number of elements in
the original range [first, last) being the first element from every
consecutive group of elements for which the corresponding condition did
hold". This could also be expressed as a separate paragraph
"Postcondition:".
h) If it is considered that the wording is unclear whether it declares
the element of a group which consists of only a single element
implicitly to be the first element of this group [Note: Such an
interpretation could eventually arise especially in case last - first ==
1] , the following additional sentence is proposed: "If such a group of
elements consists of only a single element, this element is also
considered the first element."
</p>

<p>
Change 25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 2 to:
"Returns: The iterator k."
</p>

<p>
Add a separate paragraph "Notes:" as 25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph
2a or 3a, or a separate paragraph "Postcondition:" before 25.2.8
[lib.alg.unique], paragraph 2 (wording inside {} shall be eliminated if
the preceding expressions are used, or the preceding expressions shall
be eliminated if wording inside {} is used):
</p>

<p>
"Notes:{Postcondition:} Stable: the relative order of the elements that
are placed into the subrange [first, return value {k}) shall be the same
as their relative order was in the original range [first, last) prior to
application of the algorithm."
</p>

<p>Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) It is assumed by the author that the algorithm was intended to be
stable.
In case this was not the intent, this paragraph becomes certainly
obsolete.
b) The wording "was ...  prior to application of the algorithm" is used
to explicitly distinguish the original range not only by means of
iterators, but also by a 'chronological' factor from the resulting range
[first, return value). It might be redundant.
</p>

<p>
25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 3:
</p>
<p>See DR 239.</p>

<p>
4) References to other DRs:
</p>

<p>
See DR 202, but which does not address any of the problems described in
this Defect Report [Note: This DR is supposed to complement DR 202].
See DR 239.
See DR submitted by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic
expressions.
</p>

<p>
[1]:
The wording of these references is not always unambiguous, and provided
examples partially contradict verbal description of the algorithms,
because the verbal description resembles the problematic wording of
ISO/IEC 14882:2003.
</p>

<p>
[2]:
Illustration of conforming implementations according to current wording:
</p>

<p>
One way the author of this DR considers how this "elimination" could be
achieved by a conforming implementation according to current wording is
by substituting each r-element by _any_ s-element [Note: s...stay; any
non-r-element], since all r-elements are "eliminated".
</p>

<p>
In case of a sequence consisting of elements being all 'equal' [Note:
See DR 202], substituting each r-element by the single s-element is the
only possible solution according to current wording.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>The LWG believes the standard is sufficiently clear. No
implementers get it wrong, and changing it wouldn't cause any code to
change, so there is no real-world harm here.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="491"></a>491. std::list&lt;&gt;::unique incorrectly specified</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Mang <b>Opened:</b> 2004-12-12 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>In Section 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraphs 19 to 21 describe the
behavior of the std::list&lt;T, Allocator&gt;::unique operation. However, the
current wording is defective for various reasons.</p>



<p>
1) Analysis of current wording:
</p>

<p>23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 19:</p>

<p>
Current wording says:
"Effects:  Eliminates all but the first element from every consecutive
group of equal elements referred to by the iterator i in the range
[first + 1, last) for which *i == *(i - 1) (for the version of unique
with no argument) or pred(*i, *(i -1)) (for the version of unique with a
predicate argument) holds."</p>

<p>
This sentences makes use of the undefined term "Eliminates". Although it
is, to a certain degree, reasonable to consider the term "eliminate"
synonymous with "erase", using "Erase" in the first place, as the
wording of 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 15 does, would be clearer.</p>

<p>
The range of the elements referred to by iterator i is "[first + 1,
last)". However, neither "first" nor "last" is defined.</p>

<p>
The sentence makes three times use of iterator arithmetic expressions (
"first + 1", "*i == *(i - 1)", "pred(*i, *(i -1))" ) which is not
defined for bidirectional iterator [see DR submitted by Thomas Mang
regarding invalid iterator arithmetic expressions].</p>

<p>
The same problems as pointed out in DR 202 (equivalence relation / order
of arguments for pred()) apply to this paragraph.</p>

<p>
23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 20:
</p>

<p>
Current wording says:
"Throws: Nothing unless an exception in thrown by *i == *(i-1) or
pred(*i, *(i - 1))"</p>

<p>
The sentence makes two times use of invalid iterator arithmetic
expressions ( "*i == *(i - 1)", "pred(*i, *(i -1))" ).
</p>
<p>
[Note: Minor typos: "in" / missing dot at end of sentence.]
</p>

<p>
23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 21:</p>

<p>
Current wording says:
"Complexity: If the range (last - first) is not empty, exactly (last -
first) - 1 applications of the corresponding predicate, otherwise no
application of the predicate.</p>

<p>
See DR 315 regarding "(last - first)" not yielding a range.</p>

<p>
Invalid iterator arithmetic expression "(last - first) - 1" left .</p>


<p>2) Description of intended behavior:</p>

<p>
For the rest of this Defect Report, it is assumed that "eliminate" is
supposed to be synonymous to "erase", that "first" is equivalent to an
iterator obtained by a call to begin(), "last" is equivalent to an
iterator obtained by a call to end(), and that all invalid iterator
arithmetic expressions are resolved as described in DR submitted by
Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic expressions.</p>

<p>
Furthermore, the resolutions of DR 202 are considered regarding
equivalence relation and order of arguments for a call to pred.</p>

<p>
All implementations known to the author of this Defect Report comply
with these assumptions, apart from the impact of the alternative
resolution of DR 202. Except for the changes implied by the resolutions
of DR 202, no impact on current code is expected.</p>

<p>
3) Proposed fixes:</p>

<p>
Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 19 to:</p>

<p>
"Effect: Erases all but the first element from every consecutive group
of elements, referred to by the iterator i in the range [begin(),
end()), for which the following conditions hold: *(i-1) == *i (for the
version of unique with no argument) or pred(*(i-1), *i) != false (for
the version of unique with a predicate argument)."</p>

<p>
Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) The new wording was influenced by DR 202 and the resolutions
presented there. If DR 202 is resolved in another way, the proposed
wording need also additional review.
b) "Erases" refers in the author's opinion unambiguously to the member
function "erase". In case there is doubt this might not be unamgibuous,
a direct reference to the member function "erase" is suggested [Note:
This would also imply a change of 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph
15.].
c) The expression "(i - 1)" was left, but is expected that DR submitted
by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic expressions will
take this into account.
d) The wording "(for the version of unique with no argument)" and "(for
the version of unique with a predicate argument)" was kept consciously
for clarity.
e) "begin()" substitutes "first", and "end()" substitutes "last". The
range need adjustment from "[first + 1, last)" to "[begin(), end())" to
ensure a valid range in case of an empty list.
f) If it is considered that the wording is unclear whether it declares
the element of a group which consists of only a single element
implicitly to be the first element of this group [Note: Such an
interpretation could eventually arise especially in case size() == 1] ,
the following additional sentence is proposed: "If such a group of
elements consists of only a single element, this element is also
considered the first element."</p>

<p>
Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 20 to:</p>

<p>
"Throws: Nothing unless an exception is thrown by *(i-1) == *i or
pred(*(i-1), *i)."</p>

<p>
Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) The wording regarding the conditions is identical to proposed
23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 19. If 23.3.4.4 [list.ops],
paragraph 19 is resolved in another way, the proposed wording need also
additional review.
b) The expression "(i - 1)" was left, but is expected that DR submitted
by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic expressions will
take this into account.
c) Typos fixed.</p>

<p>
Change 23.3.4.4 [list.ops], paragraph 21 to:</p>

<p>
"Complexity: If empty() == false, exactly size() - 1 applications of the
corresponding predicate, otherwise no applications of the corresponding
predicate."</p>

<p>
Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) The new wording is supposed to also replace the proposed resolution
of DR 315, which suffers from the problem of undefined "first" / "last".
</p>

<p>
5) References to other DRs:</p>

<p>See DR 202.
See DR 239.
See DR 315.
See DR submitted by Thomas Mang regarding invalid iterator arithmetic
expressions.</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>"All implementations known to the author of this Defect Report
comply with these assumption", and "no impact on current code is
expected", i.e. there is no evidence of real-world confusion or
harm.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="492"></a>492. Invalid iterator arithmetic expressions</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Mang <b>Opened:</b> 2004-12-12 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>Various clauses other than clause 25 make use of iterator arithmetic not
supported by the iterator category in question.
Algorithms in clause 25 are exceptional because of 25 [lib.algorithms],
paragraph 9, but this paragraph does not provide semantics to the
expression "iterator - n", where n denotes a value of a distance type
between iterators.</p>

<p>1) Examples of current wording:</p>

<p>Current wording outside clause 25:</p>

<p>
23.2.2.4 [lib.list.ops], paragraphs 19-21: "first + 1", "(i - 1)",
"(last - first)"
23.3.1.1 [lib.map.cons], paragraph 4: "last - first"
23.3.2.1 [lib.multimap.cons], paragraph 4: "last - first"
23.3.3.1 [lib.set.cons], paragraph 4: "last - first"
23.3.4.1 [lib.multiset.cons], paragraph 4: "last - first"
24.4.1 [lib.reverse.iterators], paragraph 1: "(i - 1)"
</p>

<p>
[Important note: The list is not complete, just an illustration. The
same issue might well apply to other paragraphs not listed here.]</p>

<p>None of these expressions is valid for the corresponding iterator
category.</p>

<p>Current wording in clause 25:</p>

<p>
25.1.1 [lib.alg.foreach], paragraph 1: "last - 1"
25.1.3 [lib.alg.find.end], paragraph 2: "[first1, last1 -
(last2-first2))"
25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 1: "(i - 1)"
25.2.8 [lib.alg.unique], paragraph 5: "(i - 1)"
</p>

<p>
However, current wording of 25 [lib.algorithms], paragraph 9 covers
neither of these four cases:</p>

<p>Current wording of 25 [lib.algorithms], paragraph 9:</p>

<p>
"In the description of the algorithms operator + 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+n is the same as that of</p>
<pre>{X tmp = a;
advance(tmp, n);
return tmp;
}
</pre>
<p>and that of b-a is the same as of return distance(a, b)"</p>

<p>
This paragrpah does not take the expression "iterator - n" into account,
where n denotes a value of a distance type between two iterators [Note:
According to current wording, the expression "iterator - n" would be
resolved as equivalent to "return distance(n, iterator)"]. Even if the
expression "iterator - n" were to be reinterpreted as equivalent to
"iterator + -n" [Note: This would imply that "a" and "b" were
interpreted implicitly as values of iterator types, and "n" as value of
a distance type], then 24.3.4/2 interfers because it says: "Requires: n
may be negative only for random access and bidirectional iterators.",
and none of the paragraphs quoted above requires the iterators on which
the algorithms operate to be of random access or bidirectional category.
</p>

<p>2) Description of intended behavior:</p>

<p>
For the rest of this Defect Report, it is assumed that the expression
"iterator1 + n" and "iterator1 - iterator2" has the semantics as
described in current 25 [lib.algorithms], paragraph 9, but applying to
all clauses. The expression "iterator1 - n" is equivalent to an
result-iterator for which the expression "result-iterator + n" yields an
iterator denoting the same position as iterator1 does. The terms
"iterator1", "iterator2" and "result-iterator" shall denote the value of
an iterator type, and the term "n" shall denote a value of a distance
type between two iterators.</p>

<p>
All implementations known to the author of this Defect Report comply
with these assumptions.
No impact on current code is expected.</p>

<p>3) Proposed fixes:</p>


<p>Change 25 [lib.algorithms], paragraph 9 to:</p>

<p>
"In the description of the algorithms operator + and - are used for some
of the iterator categories for which they do not have to be defined. In
this paragraph, a and b denote values of an iterator type, and n denotes
a value of a distance type between two iterators. In these cases the
semantics of a+n is the same as that of</p>
<pre>{X tmp = a;
advance(tmp, n);
return tmp;
}
</pre>
<p>,the semantics of a-n denotes the value of an iterator i for which the
following condition holds:
advance(i, n) == a,
and that of b-a is the same as of
return distance(a, b)".
</p>

<p>Comments to the new wording:</p>

<p>
a) The wording " In this paragraph, a and b denote values of an iterator
type, and n denotes a value of a distance type between two iterators."
was added so the expressions "b-a" and "a-n" are distinguished regarding
the types of the values on which they operate.
b) The wording ",the semantics of a-n denotes the value of an iterator i
for which the following condition holds: advance(i, n) == a" was added
to cover the expression 'iterator - n'. The wording "advance(i, n) == a"
was used to avoid a dependency on the semantics of a+n, as the wording
"i + n == a" would have implied. However, such a dependency might well
be deserved.
c) DR 225 is not considered in the new wording.
</p>

<p>
Proposed fixes regarding invalid iterator arithmetic expressions outside
clause 25:</p>

<p>
Either
a) Move modified 25 [lib.algorithms], paragraph 9 (as proposed above)
before any current invalid iterator arithmetic expression. In that case,
the first sentence of 25 [lib.algorithms], paragraph 9, need also to be
modified and could read: "For the rest of this International Standard,
...." / "In the description of the following clauses including this
...." / "In the description of the text below ..." etc. - anyways
substituting the wording "algorithms", which is a straight reference to
clause 25.
In that case, 25 [lib.algorithms] paragraph 9 will certainly become
obsolete.
Alternatively,
b) Add an appropiate paragraph similar to resolved 25 [lib.algorithms],
paragraph 9, to the beginning of each clause containing invalid iterator
arithmetic expressions.
Alternatively,
c) Fix each paragraph (both current wording and possible resolutions of
DRs) containing invalid iterator arithmetic expressions separately.
</p>

<p>5) References to other DRs:</p>

<p>
See DR 225.
See DR 237. The resolution could then also read "Linear in last -
first".
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Keep open and ask Bill to provide wording.
</blockquote>

<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-defects.html#997">997</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Hinnant: this isn't going to change any user's code or any vendor's implementation.
</p>
<p>
No objection to "NAD without prejudice." If anyone proposes a
resolution, the LWG will consider it.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p><i>[Lillehammer: Minor issue, but real. We have a blanket statement
about this in 25/11. But (a) it should be in 17, not 25; and (b) it's
not quite broad enough, because there are some arithmetic expressions
it doesn't cover. Bill will provide wording.]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="493"></a>493. Undefined Expression in Input Iterator Note Title</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2004-12-13 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>1) In 24.1.1/3, the following text is currently present.</p>

<p>"Note: For input iterators, a==b does not imply ++a=++b (Equality does
not guarantee the substitution property or referential transparency)."</p>

<p>However, when in Table 72, part of the definition of ++r is given as:</p>

<p>"pre: r is dereferenceable.
post: any copies of the previous value of r are no longer required
either to be dereferenceable ..."</p>

<p>While a==b does not imply that b is a copy of a, this statement should
perhaps still be made more clear.</p>

<p>2) There are no changes to intended behaviour</p>

<p>
3) This Note should be altered to say "Note: For input iterators a==b,
when its behaviour is defined ++a==++b may still be false (Equality does
not guarantee the substitution property or referential transparency).</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>This is descriptive text, not normative, and the meaning is clear.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="494"></a>494. Wrong runtime complexity for associative container's insert and delete</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Hans B os <b>Opened:</b> 2004-12-19 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>According to [lib.associative.reqmts] table 69, the runtime comlexity
of insert(p, t) and erase(q) can be done in amortized constant time.</p>

<p>It was my understanding that an associative container could be
implemented as a balanced binary tree.</p>

<p>For inser(p, t), you 'll have to iterate to p's next node to see if t
can be placed next to p.  Furthermore, the insertion usually takes
place at leaf nodes. An insert next to the root node will be done at
the left of the root next node</p>

<p>So when p is the root node you 'll have to iterate from the root to
its next node, which  takes O(log(size)) time in a balanced tree.</p>

<p>If you insert all values with insert(root, t) (where root is the
root of the tree before insertion) then each insert takes O(log(size))
time.  The amortized complexity per insertion will be O(log(size))
also.</p>

<p>For erase(q), the normal algorithm for deleting a node that has no
empty left or right subtree, is to iterate to the next (or previous),
which is a leaf node. Then exchange the node with the next and delete
the leaf node.  Furthermore according to DR 130, erase should return
the next node of the node erased.  Thus erasing the root node,
requires iterating to the next node.</p>

<p>Now if you empty a map by deleting the root node until the map is
empty, each operation will take O(log(size)), and the amortized
complexity is still O(log(size)).</p>

<p>The operations can be done in amortized constant time if iterating
to the next node can be done in (non amortized) constant time.  This
can be done by putting all nodes in a double linked list.  This
requires two extra links per node.  To me this is a bit overkill since
you can already efficiently insert or erase ranges with erase(first,
last) and insert(first, last).</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Only "amortized constant" in special circumstances, and we believe
  that's implementable. That is: doing this N times will be O(N), not
  O(log N).</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="499"></a>499. Std. doesn't seem to require stable_sort() to be stable!</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.1.2 [stable.sort] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Prateek Karandikar <b>Opened:</b> 2005-04-12 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<blockquote><p>
17.3.1.1 Summary</p>

<p>
1 The Summary provides a synopsis of the category, and introduces the 
first-level subclauses. Each subclause also provides a summary, listing 
the headers specified in the subclause and the library entities 
provided in each header. 
</p>
<p>
2 Paragraphs labelled "Note(s):" or "Example(s):" are informative, 
other paragraphs are normative.
</p></blockquote> 

<p>So this means that a "Notes" paragraph wouldn't be normative. </p>

<blockquote><p>
25.3.1.2 stable_sort
</p>
<pre>template&lt;class RandomAccessIterator&gt; 
void stable_sort(RandomAccessIterat or first, RandomAccessIterator last); 

template&lt;class RandomAccessIterator, class Compare&gt; 
void stable_sort(RandomAccessIterat or first, RandomAccessIterator last, Compare comp);
</pre>
<p>
1 Effects: Sorts the elements in the range [first, last).
</p>
<p>
2 Complexity: It does at most N(log N)^2 (where N == last - first) 
comparisons; if enough extra memory is available, it is N log N.
</p>
<p>
3 Notes: Stable: the relative order of the equivalent elements is 
preserved. 
</p></blockquote> 

<p>
The Notes para is informative, and nowhere else is stability mentioned above. 
</p>

<p>
Also, I just searched for the word "stable" in my copy of the Standard. 
and the phrase "Notes: Stable: the relative order of the elements..." 
is repeated several times in the Standard library clauses for 
describing various functions. How is it that stability is talked about 
in the informative paragraph? Or am I missing something obvious? 
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
This change has already been made.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="500"></a>500. do_length cannot be implemented correctly</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Krzysztof &#379;elechowski <b>Opened:</b> 2005-05-24 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>codecvt::do_length is of type int;</li>
<li>it is assumed to be sort-of returning from_next - from of type ptrdiff_t;</li>
<li>ptrdiff_t cannot be cast to an int without data loss.</li>
</ol>
<p>
Contradiction.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="501"></a>501. Proposal: strengthen guarantees of lib.comparisons</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [base] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Me &lt;anti_spam_email2003@yahoo.com&gt; <b>Opened:</b> 2005-06-07 <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#base">issues</a> in [base].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<blockquote><p>
"For templates greater, less, greater_equal, and less_equal,
the specializations for any pointer type yield a total order, even if
the built-in operators &lt;, &gt;, &lt;=, &gt;= do not."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The standard should do much better than guarantee that these provide a
total order, it should guarantee that it can be used to test if memory
overlaps, i.e. write a portable memmove. You can imagine a platform
where the built-in operators use a uint32_t comparison (this tests for
overlap on this platform) but the less&lt;T*&gt; functor is allowed to be
defined to use a int32_t comparison. On this platform, if you use
std::less with the intent of making a portable memmove, comparison on
an array that straddles the 0x7FFFFFFF/0x8000000 boundary can give
incorrect results.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a footnote to 20.5.3/8 saying:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Given a p1 and p2 such that p1 points to N objects of type T and p2
points to M objects of type T. If [p1,p1+N) does not overlap [p2,p2+M),
less returns the same value when comparing all pointers in [p1,p1+N) to
all pointers in [p2,p2+M). Otherwise, there is a value Q and a value R
such that less returns the same value when comparing all pointers in
[p1,p1+Q) to all pointers in [p2,p2+R) and an opposite value when
comparing all pointers in [p1+Q,p1+N) to all pointers in [p2+R,p2+M).
For the sake of completeness, the null pointer value (4.10) for T is
considered to be an array of 1 object that doesn't overlap with any
non-null pointer to T. less_equal, greater, greater_equal, equal_to,
and not_equal_to give the expected results based on the total ordering
semantics of less. For T of void, treat it as having similar semantics
as T of char i.e. less&lt;cv T*&gt;(a, b) gives the same results as less&lt;cv
void*&gt;(a, b) which gives the same results as less&lt;cv char*&gt;((cv
char*)(cv void*)a, (cv char*)(cv void*)b).
</p></blockquote>

<p>
I'm also thinking there should be a footnote to 20.5.3/1 saying that if
A and B are similar types (4.4/4), comp&lt;A&gt;(a,b) returns the same value
as comp&lt;B&gt;(a,b) (where comp is less, less_equal, etc.). But this might
be problematic if there is some really funky operator overloading going
on that does different things based on cv (that should be undefined
behavior if somebody does that though). This at least should be
guaranteed for all POD types (especially pointers) that use the
built-in comparison operators.
</p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
less is already required to provide a strict weak ordering which is good enough
to detect overlapping memory situations.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="502"></a>502. Proposition: Clarification of the interaction between a facet and an iterator</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Conrade Zseleghovski <b>Opened:</b> 2005-06-07 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Motivation:
</p>

<p>
This requirement seems obvious to me, it is the essence of code modularity. 
I have complained to Mr. Plauger that the Dinkumware library does not 
observe this principle but he objected that this behaviour is not covered in 
the standard.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
No objection to NAD, Fixed.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Append the following point to 22.1.1.1.1:
</p>

<p>
6. The implementation of a facet of Table 52 parametrized with an 
InputIterator/OutputIterator should use that iterator only as character 
source/sink respectively.
For a *_get facet, it means that the value received depends only on the 
sequence of input characters and not on how they are accessed.
For a *_put facet, it means that the sequence of characters output depends 
only on the value to be formatted and not of how the characters are stored.
</p>

<p><i>[
Berlin:  Moved to Open, Need to clean up this area to make it clear
locales don't have to contain open ended sets of facets. Jack, Howard,
Bill.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="503"></a>503. more on locales</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2005-06-20 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
a) In 22.2.1.1 para. 2 we refer to "the instantiations required in Table
51" to refer to the facet *objects* associated with a locale. And we
almost certainly mean just those associated with the default or "C"
locale. Otherwise, you can't switch to a locale that enforces a different
mapping between narrow and wide characters, or that defines additional
uppercase characters.
</p>

<p>
b) 22.2.1.5 para. 3 (codecvt) has the same issues.
</p>

<p>
c) 22.2.1.5.2 (do_unshift) is even worse. It *forbids* the generation of
a homing sequence for the basic character set, which might very well need
one.
</p>

<p>
d) 22.2.1.5.2 (do_length) likewise dictates that the default mapping
between wide and narrow characters be taken as one-for-one.
</p>

<p>
e) 22.2.2 para. 2 (num_get/put) is both muddled and vacuous, as far as
I can tell. The muddle is, as before, calling Table 51 a list of
instantiations. But the constraint it applies seems to me to cover
*all* defined uses of num_get/put, so why bother to say so?
</p>

<p>
f) 22.2.3.1.2 para. 1(do_decimal_point) says "The required instantiations
return '.' or L'.'.) Presumably this means "as appropriate for the
character type. But given the vague definition of "required" earlier,
this overrules *any* change of decimal point for non "C" locales.
Surely we don't want to do that.
</p>

<p>
g) 22.2.3.1.2 para. 2 (do_thousands_sep) says "The required instantiations
return ',' or L','.) As above, this probably means "as appropriate for the
character type. But this overrules the "C" locale, which requires *no*
character ('\0') for the thousands separator. Even if we agree that we
don't mean to block changes in decimal point or thousands separator,
we should also eliminate this clear incompatibility with C.
</p>

<p>
h) 22.2.3.1.2 para. 2 (do_grouping) says "The required instantiations
return the empty string, indicating no grouping." Same considerations
as for do_decimal_point.
</p>

<p>
i) 22.2.4.1 para. 1 (collate) refers to "instantiations required in Table
51". Same bad jargon.
</p>

<p>
j) 22.2.4.1.2 para. 1 (do_compare) refers to "instantiations required
in Table 51". Same bad jargon.
</p>

<p>
k) 22.2.5 para. 1 (time_get/put) uses the same muddled and vacuous
as num_get/put.
</p>

<p>
l) 22.2.6 para. 2 (money_get/put) uses the same muddled and vacuous
as num_get/put.
</p>

<p>
m) 22.2.6.3.2 (do_pos/neg_format) says "The instantiations required
in Table 51 ... return an object of type pattern initialized to
{symbol, sign, none, value}." This once again *overrides* the "C"
locale, as well as any other locale."
</p>

<p>
3) We constrain the use_facet calls that can be made by num_get/put,
so why don't we do the same for money_get/put? Or for any of the
other facets, for that matter?
</p>

<p>
4) As an almost aside, we spell out when a facet needs to use the ctype
facet, but several also need to use a codecvt facet and we don't say so.
</p>
<p><i>[
Berlin: Bill to provide wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
No objection to NAD.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="504"></a>504. Integer types in pseudo-random number engine 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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In [tr.rand.req], Paragraph 2 states that "... s is a value of integral type,
g is an ... object returning values of unsigned integral type ..."
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 5.1.1 [tr.rand.req], Paragraph 2 replace
</p>

<blockquote><p>
... s is a value of integral type, g is an lvalue of a type other than X that
defines a zero-argument function object returning values of <del>unsigned integral</del> type
<ins><tt>unsigned long int</tt></ins>,
...
</p></blockquote>

<p>
In 5.1.1 [tr.rand.seq], Table 16, replace in the line for X(s)
</p>

<blockquote><p>
creates an engine with the initial internal state
determined by <ins><tt>static_cast&lt;unsigned long&gt;(</tt></ins><tt><i>s</i></tt><ins><tt>)</tt></ins>
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Mont Tremblant:  Both s and g should be unsigned long.
This should refer to the constructor signatures. Jens  provided wording post Mont Tremblant.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Berlin:  N1932 adopts the proposed resolution:  see 26.3.1.3/1e and Table 3 row 2. Moved
to Ready.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Jens:  Just requiring X(unsigned long) still makes it possible
for an evil library writer to also supply a X(int) that does something
unexpected.  The wording above requires that X(s) always performs
as if X(unsigned long) would have been called.  I believe that is
sufficient and implements our intentions from Mont Tremblant.  I
see no additional use in actually requiring a X(unsigned long)
signature.  u.seed(s) is covered by its reference to X(s), same
arguments.
</p>


<p><i>[
Portland:  Subsumed by N2111.
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="506"></a>506. Requirements of Distribution parameter for variate_generator</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 3 requires that template argument U (which corresponds to template
parameter Engine) satisfy all uniform random number generator requirements.
However, there is no  analogous requirement regarding the template argument
that corresponds to template parameter Distribution.  We believe there should
be, and that it should require that this template argument satisfy all random
distribution requirements.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Consequence 1: Remove the precondition clauses [tr.rand.var]/16 and /18.
</p>
<p>
Consequence 2: Add max() and min() functions to those distributions that
do not already have them.
</p>

<p><i>[
Mont Tremblant: Jens reccommends NAD, min/max not needed everywhere.
Marc supports having min and max to satisfy generic programming interface.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>Berlin:  N1932 makes this moot: variate_generator has been eliminated.</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="509"></a>509. Uniform_int template parameters</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.1 [rand.dist.uni], TR1 5.1.7.1 [tr.rand.dist.iunif] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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.dist.uni">issues</a> in [rand.dist.uni].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In [tr.rand.dist.iunif] the uniform_int distribution currently has a single
template parameter, IntType, used as the input_type and as the result_type
of the distribution.  We believe there is no reason to conflate these types
in this way.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
We recommend that there be a second template  parameter to
reflect the distribution's input_type, and that the existing first template
parameter continue to reflect (solely) the result_type:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class IntType = int, UIntType = unsigned int &gt;
class uniform_int
{
public:
  // types
  typedef  UIntType  input_type;
  typedef  IntType   result_type;
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Berlin: Moved to NAD.  N1932 makes this moot: the input_type template parameter has been
eliminated.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="510"></a>510. Input_type for bernoulli_distribution</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.2 [rand.dist.bern], TR1 5.1.7.2 [tr.rand.dist.bern] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In [tr.rand.dist.bern] the distribution currently requires;
</p>
<blockquote><pre>typedef  int  input_type;
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
We believe this is an unfortunate choice, and recommend instead:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>typedef  unsigned int  input_type;
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Berlin:  Moved to NAD. N1932 makes this moot: the input_type template parameter has been
eliminated.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="511"></a>511. Input_type for binomial_distribution</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8 [rand.dist], TR1 5.1.7.5 [tr.rand.dist.bin] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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.dist">issues</a> in [rand.dist].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Unlike all other distributions in TR1, this binomial_distribution has an
implementation-defined  input_type.  We believe this is an unfortunate choice,
because it hinders users from writing portable code.  It also hinders the
writing of compliance tests.  We recommend instead:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>typedef  RealType  input_type;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
While this choice is somewhat arbitrary (as it was for some of the other
distributions), we make  this particular choice because (unlike all other
distributions) otherwise this template would not publish its RealType
argument and so users could not write generic code that accessed this
second template parameter.  In this respect, the choice is consistent with
the other distributions in  TR1. 
</p>
<p>
We have two reasons for recommending that a real type be specified instead.
One reason is  based specifically on characteristics of binomial distribution
implementations, while the other is based on mathematical characteristics of
probability distribution functions in general.
</p>
<p>
Implementations of binomial distributions commonly use Stirling approximations
for values in certain ranges.  It is far more natural to use real values to
represent these approximations than it would be to use integral values to do
so.  In other ranges, implementations reply on the Bernoulli  distribution to
obtain values.  While TR1's bernoulli_distribution::input_type is specified as
int, we believe this would be better specified as double.
</p>
<p>
This brings us to our main point:  The notion of a random distribution rests
on the notion of a cumulative distribution function, which in turn mathematically
depends on a continuous dependent variable.  Indeed, such a distribution function
would be meaningless if it depended on  discrete values such as integers - and this
remains true even if the distribution function were to take discrete steps.
</p>
<p>
Although this note is specifically about binomial_distribution::input_type,
we intend to recommend that all of the random distributions input_types be
specified as a real type (either a RealType template parameter, or double,
as appropriate).
</p>
<p>
Of the nine distributions in TR1, four already have this characteristic
(uniform_real, exponential_distribution, normal_distribution, and
gamma_distribution).  We have already argued the case for the binomial the
remaining four distributions.
</p>
<p>
In the case of uniform_int, we believe that the calculations to produce an
integer result in a  specified range from an integer in a different specified
range is best done using real arithmetic.  This is because it involves a
product, one of whose terms is the ratio of the extents of the two ranges.
Without real arithmetic, the results become less uniform: some numbers become
more  (or less) probable that they should be.  This is, of course, undesireable
behavior in a uniform distribution.
</p>
<p>
Finally, we believe that in the case of the bernoulli_distribution (briefly
mentioned earlier), as well as the cases of the geometric_distribution and the
poisson_distribution, it would be far more natural to have a real input_type.
This is because the most natural computation involves the  random number
delivered and the distribution's parameter p (in the case of bernoulli_distribution,
for example, the computation is a comparison against p), and p is already specified
in each case as having some real type.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<blockquote><pre>typedef  RealType  input_type;
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Berlin:  Moved to NAD.  N1932 makes this moot: the input_type template parameter has been
eliminated.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="512"></a>512. Seeding subtract_with_carry_01 from a single unsigned long</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3 [rand.eng], TR1 5.1.4.4 [tr.rand.eng.sub1] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 8 specifies the algorithm by which a subtract_with_carry_01  engine
is to be seeded given a single unsigned long.  This algorithm is seriously
flawed in the case where the engine parameter w (also known as word_size)
exceeds 31 [bits].  The key part of the paragraph reads:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
sets x(-r) ... x(-1) to (lcg(1)*2**(-w)) mod 1
</p></blockquote>
<p>
and so forth. 
</p>
<p>
Since the specified linear congruential engine, lcg, delivers numbers with
a maximum of 2147483563 (just a shade under 31 bits), then when w is, for
example, 48, each of the x(i) will be less than 2**-17.  The consequence
is that roughly the first 400 numbers delivered will be  conspicuously
close to either zero or one.
</p>
<p>
Unfortunately, this is not an innocuous flaw:  One of the predefined engines
in [tr.rand.predef],  namely ranlux64_base_01, has w = 48 and would exhibit
this poor behavior, while the original N1378 proposal states that these
pre-defined engines are intended to be of "known good properties."
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 5.1.4.4 [tr.rand.eng.sub1], replace the "effects" clause for
void seed(unsigned long value = 19780503) by
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>value == 0</tt>, sets value to <tt>19780503</tt>. In any
case, <del>with a linear congruential generator <tt>lcg</tt>(i) having parameters
<tt><i>m<sub>lcg</sub></i> = 2147483563</tt>, <tt><i>a<sub>lcg</sub></i> = 40014</tt>,
<tt><i>c<sub>lcg</sub></i> = 0</tt>, and <tt><i>lcg</i>(0) = value</tt>,</del>
sets <ins>carry<tt>(-1)</tt> and</ins> <tt>x(-r) � x(-1)</tt>
<ins>as if executing</ins></p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>
linear_congruential&lt;unsigned long, 40014, 0, 2147483563&gt; lcg(value);
seed(lcg);
</ins></pre></blockquote>

<p>
<del>to <tt>(<i>lcg</i>(1) � 2<sup>-<i>w</i></sup>) mod 1
� (<i>lcg</i>(<i>r</i>) � 2<sup>-<i>w</i></sup>) mod 1</tt>,
respectively. If <tt><i>x</i>(-1) == 0</tt>, sets carry<tt>(-1) = 2<sup>-<i>w</i></sup></tt>,
else sets carry<tt>(-1) = 0</tt>.</del></p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Jens provided revised wording post Mont Tremblant.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Berlin: N1932 adopts the originally-proposed resolution of the issue.
Jens's supplied wording is a clearer description of what is
intended.  Moved to Ready.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Jens: I'm using an explicit type here, because fixing the
prose would probably not qualify for the (with issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#504">504</a> even
stricter) requirements we have for seed(Gen&amp;).
</p>

<p><i>[
Portland:  Subsumed by N2111.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="513"></a>513. Size of state for subtract_with_carry_01</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3 [rand.eng], TR1 5.1.4.4 [tr.rand.eng.sub1] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 3 begins:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The size of the state is r.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
However, this is not quite consistent with the remainder of the paragraph
which specifies a total  of nr+1 items in the textual representation of
the state.  We recommend the sentence be corrected to match:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The size of the state is nr+1.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
To give meaning to the coefficient n, it may be also desirable to move
n's definition from later in the paragraph.  Either of the following
seem reasonable formulations:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
With n=..., the size of the state is nr+1.
</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>
The size of the state is nr+1, where n=... .
</p></blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>[
Jens:  I plead for "NAD" on the grounds that "size of state" is only
used as an argument for big-O complexity notation, thus
constant factors and additions don't count.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Berlin: N1932 adopts the proposed NAD.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="514"></a>514. Size of state for subtract_with_carry</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3.3 [rand.eng.sub], TR1 5.1.4.3 [tr.rand.eng.sub] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 2 begins:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The size of the state is r.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
However, the next sentence specifies a total of r+1 items in the textual
representation of the state,  r specific x's as well as a specific carry.
This makes a total of r+1 items that constitute the size of the state,
rather than r.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
We recommend the sentence be corrected to match:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
 The size of the state is r+1.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Jens:  I plead for "NAD" on the grounds that "size of state" is only
used as an argument for big-O complexity notation, thus
constant factors and additions don't count.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Berlin: N1932 adopts the proposed NAD.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="515"></a>515. Random number engine traits</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.2 [rand.synopsis], TR1 5.1.2 [tr.rand.synopsis] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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.synopsis">issues</a> in [rand.synopsis].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
To accompany the concept of a pseudo-random number engine as defined in Table 17,
we propose and recommend an adjunct template, engine_traits, to be declared in
[tr.rand.synopsis] as:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class PSRE &gt;
class engine_traits;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
This template's primary purpose would be as an aid to generic programming involving
pseudo-random number engines.  Given only the facilities described in tr1, it would
be very difficult to produce any algorithms involving the notion of a generic engine.
The intent of this proposal is to  provide, via engine_traits&lt;&gt;, sufficient
descriptive information to allow an algorithm to employ a pseudo-random number engine
without regard to its exact type, i.e., as a template parameter.
</p>
<p>
For example, today it is not possible to write an efficient generic function that
requires any specific number of random bits.  More specifically, consider a
cryptographic application that internally needs 256 bits of randomness per call:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class Eng, class InIter, class OutIter &gt;
void crypto( Eng&amp; e, InIter in, OutIter out );
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Without knowning the number of bits of randomness produced per call to a provided
engine, the algorithm has no means of determining how many times to call the engine.
</p>
<p>
In a new section [tr.rand.eng.traits], we proposed to define the engine_traits
template as: 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class PSRE &gt;
class engine_traits
{
  static  std::size_t  bits_of_randomness = 0u;
  static  std::string  name()  { return "unknown_engine"; }
  // TODO: other traits here
};
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Further, each engine described in [tr.rand.engine] would be accompanied by a
complete specialization of this new engine_traits template.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>[
Berlin:  Walter: While useful for implementation per TR1, N1932 has no need for this
feature.  Recommend close as NAD.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1932.pdf">N1932</a>,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2111.pdf">N2111</a>
covers this.  Already in WP.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="516"></a>516. Seeding subtract_with_carry_01 using a generator</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3 [rand.eng], TR1 5.1.4.4 [tr.rand.eng.sub1] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 6 says:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
... obtained by successive invocations of g, ... 
</p></blockquote>
<p>
We recommend instead:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
... obtained by taking successive invocations of g mod 2**32, ...
</p></blockquote>
<p>
as the context seems to require only 32-bit quantities be used here.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Berlin: N1932 adopts the proposed resultion: see 26.3.3.4/7.  Moved to Ready.
</p>

<p><i>[
Portland:  Subsumed by N2111.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="517"></a>517. Should include name in external representation</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The last two rows of Table 16 deal with the i/o requirements of an engine,
specifying that the textual representation of an engine's state,
appropriately formatted, constitute the engine's  external representation.
</p>
<p>
This seems adequate when an engine's type is known.  However, it seems
inadequate in the  context of generic code, where it becomes useful and
perhaps even necessary to determine an engine's type via input.
</p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
We therefore recommend that, in each of these two rows of Table 16, the
text "textual representation" be expanded so as to read "engine name
followed by the textual representation."
</p>

<p><i>[
Berlin: N1932 considers this NAD. This is a QOI issue.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="523"></a>523. regex case-insensitive character ranges are unimplementable as specified</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28 [re] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
A problem with TR1 regex is currently being discussed on the Boost 
developers list. It involves the handling of case-insensitive matching 
of character ranges such as [Z-a]. The proper behavior (according to the 
ECMAScript standard) is unimplementable given the current specification 
of the TR1 regex_traits&lt;&gt; class template. John Maddock, the author of 
the TR1 regex proposal, agrees there is a problem. The full discussion 
can be found at http://lists.boost.org/boost/2005/06/28850.php (first 
message copied below). We don't have any recommendations as yet.
</p>
<p>
-- Begin original message --
</p>
<p>
The situation of interest is described in the ECMAScript specification
(ECMA-262), section 15.10.2.15:
</p>
<p>
"Even if the pattern ignores case, the case of the two ends of a range
is significant in determining which characters belong to the range.
Thus, for example, the pattern /[E-F]/i matches only the letters E, F,
e, and f, while the pattern /[E-f]/i matches all upper and lower-case
ASCII letters as well as the symbols [, \, ], ^, _, and `."
</p>
<p>
A more interesting case is what should happen when doing a
case-insentitive match on a range such as [Z-a]. It should match z, Z,
a, A and the symbols [, \, ], ^, _, and `. This is not what happens with
Boost.Regex (it throws an exception from the regex constructor).
</p>
<p>
The tough pill to swallow is that, given the specification in TR1, I
don't think there is any effective way to handle this situation.
According to the spec, case-insensitivity is handled with
regex_traits&lt;&gt;::translate_nocase(CharT) -- two characters are equivalent
if they compare equal after both are sent through the translate_nocase
function. But I don't see any way of using this translation function to
make character ranges case-insensitive. Consider the difficulty of
detecting whether "z" is in the range [Z-a]. Applying the transformation
to "z" has no effect (it is essentially std::tolower). And we're not
allowed to apply the transformation to the ends of the range, because as
ECMA-262 says, "the case of the two ends of a range is significant."
</p>
<p>
So AFAICT, TR1 regex is just broken, as is Boost.Regex. One possible fix
is to redefine translate_nocase to return a string_type containing all
the characters that should compare equal to the specified character. But
this function is hard to implement for Unicode, and it doesn't play nice
with the existing ctype facet. What a mess!
</p>
<p>
-- End original message --
</p>

<p><i>[
John Maddock adds:
]</i></p>


<p>
One small correction, I have since found that ICU's regex package does 
implement this correctly, using a similar mechanism to the current 
TR1.Regex.
</p>
<p>
Given an expression [c1-c2] that is compiled as case insensitive it:
</p>
<p>
Enumerates every character in the range c1 to c2 and converts it to it's 
case folded equivalent.  That case folded character is then used a key to a 
table of equivalence classes, and each member of the class is added to the 
list of possible matches supported by the character-class.  This second step 
isn't possible with our current traits class design, but isn't necessary if 
the input text is also converted to a case-folded equivalent on the fly.
</p>
<p>
ICU applies similar brute force mechanisms to character classes such as 
[[:lower:]] and [[:word:]], however these are at least cached, so the impact 
is less noticeable in this case.
</p>
<p>
Quick and dirty performance comparisons show that expressions such as 
"[X-\\x{fff0}]+" are indeed very slow to compile with ICU (about 200 times 
slower than a "normal" expression).  For an application that uses a lot of 
regexes this could have a noticeable performance impact.  ICU also has an 
advantage in that it knows the range of valid characters codes: code points 
outside that range are assumed not to require enumeration, as they can not 
be part of any equivalence class.  I presume that if we want the TR1.Regex 
to work with arbitrarily large character sets enumeration really does become 
impractical.
</p>
<p>
Finally note that Unicode has:
</p>
<p>
Three cases (upper, lower and title).
One to many, and many to one case transformations.
Character that have context sensitive case translations - for example an 
uppercase sigma has two different lowercase forms  - the form chosen depends 
on context(is it end of a word or not), a caseless match for an upper case 
sigma should match either of the lower case forms, which is why case folding 
is often approximated by tolower(toupper(c)).
</p>
<p>
Probably we need some way to enumerate character equivalence classes, 
including digraphs (either as a result or an input), and some way to tell 
whether the next character pair is a valid digraph in the current locale.
</p>
<p>
Hoping this doesn't make this even more complex that it was already,
</p>

<p><i>[
Portland:  Alisdair: Detect as invalid, throw an exception.
Pete: Possible general problem with case insensitive ranges.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We agree that this is a problem, but we do not know the answer.
</p>
<p>
We are going to declare this NAD until existing practice leads us in some direction.
</p>
<p>
No objection to NAD Future.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="526"></a>526. Is it undefined if a function in the standard changes in parameters?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2005-09-14 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Problem: There are a number of places in the C++ standard library where
it is possible to write what appear to be sensible ways of calling
functions, but which can cause problems in some (or all)
implementations, as they cause the values given to the function to be
changed in a way not specified in standard (and therefore not coded to
correctly work). These fall into two similar categories.
</p>

<p>
1) Parameters taken by const reference can be changed during execution
of the function
</p>

<p>
Examples:
</p>

<p>
Given std::vector&lt;int&gt; v:
</p>
<p>
v.insert(v.begin(), v[2]);
</p>
<p>
v[2] can be changed by moving elements of vector
</p>


<p>
Given std::list&lt;int&gt; l:
</p>
<p>
l.remove(*l.begin());
</p>
<p>
Will delete the first element, and then continue trying to access it.
This is particularily vicious, as it will appear to work in almost all
cases.
</p>

<p>
2) A range is given which changes during the execution of the function:
Similarly,
</p>

<p>
v.insert(v.begin(), v.begin()+4, v.begin()+6);
</p>

<p>
This kind of problem has been partly covered in some cases. For example
std::copy(first, last, result) states that result cannot be in the range
[first, last). However, does this cover the case where result is a
reverse_iterator built from some iterator in the range [first, last)?
Also, std::copy would still break if result was reverse_iterator(last +
1), yet this is not forbidden by the standard
</p>

<p>
Solution:
</p>

<p>
One option would be to try to more carefully limit the requirements of
each function. There are many functions which would have to be checked.
However as has been shown in the std::copy case, this may be difficult.
A simpler, more global option would be to somewhere insert text similar to:
</p>

<p>
If the execution of any function would change either any values passed
by reference or any value in any range passed to a function in a way not
defined in the definition of that function, the result is undefined.
</p>

<p>
Such code would have to at least cover chapters 23 and 25 (the sections
I read through carefully). I can see no harm on applying it to much of
the rest of the standard.
</p>

<p>
Some existing parts of the standard could be improved to fit with this,
for example the requires for 25.2.1 (Copy) could be adjusted to:
</p>

<p>
Requires: For each non-negative integer n &lt; (last - first), assigning to
*(result + n) must not alter any value in the range [first + n, last).
</p>

<p>
However, this may add excessive complication.
</p>

<p>
One other benefit of clearly introducing this text is that it would
allow a number of small optimisations, such as caching values passed
by const reference.
</p>

<p>
Matt Austern adds that this issue also exists for the <tt>insert</tt> and
<tt>erase</tt> members of the ordered and unordered associative containers.
</p>

<p><i>[
Berlin: Lots of controversey over how this should be solved. Lots of confusion
as to whether we're talking about self referencing iterators or references.
Needs a good survey as to the cases where this matters, for which
implementations, and how expensive it is to fix each case.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>
<ul>
<li><tt>vector::insert(iter, value)</tt> is required to work because the standard
doesn't give permission for it not to work.</li>
<li><tt>list::remove(value)</tt> is required to work because the standard
doesn't give permission for it not to work.</li>
<li><tt>vector::insert(iter, iter, iter)</tt> is not required to work because
23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts], p4 says so.</li>
<li><tt>copy</tt> has to work, except where 25.3.1 [alg.copy] says
it doesn't have to work.  While a language lawyer can tear this wording apart,
it is felt that the wording is not prone to accidental interpretation.</li>
<li>The current working draft provide exceptions for the unordered associative
containers similar to the containers requirements which exempt the member
template insert functions from self referencing.</li>
</ul>





<hr>
<h3><a name="528"></a>528. <tt>const_iterator</tt> <tt>iterator</tt> issue when they are the same type</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.7 [unord], TR1 6.3.4 [tr.unord.unord] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2005-10-12 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
while implementing the resolution of issue 6.19 I'm noticing the
following: according to 6.3.4.3/2 (and 6.3.4.5/2), for unordered_set and
unordered_multiset:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
    "The iterator and const_iterator types are both const types. It is
unspecified whether they are the same type"
</p></blockquote>

<p>
Now, according to the resolution of 6.19, we have overloads of insert
with hint and erase (single and range) both for iterator and
const_iterator, which, AFAICS, can be meaningful at the same time *only*
if iterator and const_iterator *are* in fact different types.
</p>
<p>
Then, iterator and const_iterator are *required* to be different types?
Or that is an unintended consequence? Maybe the overloads for plain
iterators should be added only to unordered_map and unordered_multimap?
Or, of course, I'm missing something?
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to 6.3.4.3p2 (and 6.3.4.5p2):
</p>
<p>
2  ... The iterator and const_iterator types are both <del>const</del>
<ins>constant</ins> iterator types.
It is unspecified whether they are the same type. 
</p>

<p>
Add a new subsection to 17.4.4 [lib.conforming]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
An implementation shall not supply an overloaded function
       signature specified in any library clause if such a signature
       would be inherently ambiguous during overload resolution
       due to two library types referring to the same type.
</p>
<p>
       [Note: For example, this occurs when a container's iterator
       and const_iterator types are the same. -- end note]
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post-Berlin: Beman supplied wording.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Toronto:  The first issue has been fixed by N2350 (the insert and erase members
are collapsed into one signature).  Alisdair to open a separate issue on the
chapter 17 wording.





<hr>
<h3><a name="529"></a>529. The standard encourages redundant and confusing preconditions</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.3.11 [res.on.required] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2005-10-25 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
17.4.3.8/1 says:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Violation of the preconditions specified in a function's 
Required behavior: paragraph results in undefined behavior unless the 
function's Throws: paragraph specifies throwing an exception when the 
precondition is violated.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
This implies that a precondition violation can lead to defined
behavior.  That conflicts with the only reasonable definition of
precondition: that a violation leads to undefined behavior.  Any other
definition muddies the waters when it comes to analyzing program
correctness, because precondition violations may be routinely done in
correct code (e.g. you can use std::vector::at with the full
expectation that you'll get an exception when your index is out of
range, catch the exception, and continue).  Not only is it a bad
example to set, but it encourages needless complication and redundancy
in the standard.  For example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>  21 Strings library 
  21.3.3 basic_string capacity

  void resize(size_type n, charT c);

  5 Requires: n &lt;= max_size()
  6 Throws: length_error if n &gt; max_size().
  7 Effects: Alters the length of the string designated by *this as follows:
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The Requires clause is entirely redundant and can be dropped.  We
could make that simplifying change (and many others like it) even
without changing 17.4.3.8/1; the wording there just seems to encourage
the redundant and error-prone Requires: clause.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia:  Alan and Pete to work.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:  NAD Editorial, this group likes 
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2121.html">N2121</a>,
Pete agrees, accepting it is Pete's business.
General agreement that precondition violations are synonymous with UB.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
1. Change 17.4.3.8/1 to read:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Violation of the preconditions specified in a function's
<i>Required behavior:</i> paragraph results in undefined behavior
<del>unless the function's <i>Throws:</i> paragraph specifies throwing
an exception when the precondition is violated</del>.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
2. Go through and remove redundant Requires: clauses.  Specifics to be
   provided by Dave A.
</p>

<p><i>[
Berlin: The LWG requests a detailed survey of part 2 of the proposed resolution.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Alan provided the survey
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2121.html">N2121</a>.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="532"></a>532. Tuple comparison</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.7 [tuple.rel], TR1 6.1.3.5 [tr.tuple.rel] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-29 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#348">348</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Where possible, tuple comparison operators &lt;,&lt;=,=&gt;, and &gt; ought to be
defined in terms of std::less rather than operator&lt;, in order to
support comparison of tuples of pointers.  
</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>
<p>
If we solve this for <tt>tuple</tt> we would have to solve it for <tt>pair</tt>
algorithms, etc.  It is too late to do that at this time.  Move to NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
change 6.1.3.5/5 from:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
  Returns: The result of a lexicographical comparison between t and
  u. The result is defined as: (bool)(get&lt;0&gt;(t) &lt; get&lt;0&gt;(u)) ||
  (!(bool)(get&lt;0&gt;(u) &lt; get&lt;0&gt;(t)) &amp;&amp; ttail &lt; utail), where rtail for
  some tuple r is a tuple containing all but the first element of
  r. For any two zero-length tuples e and f, e &lt; f returns false.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
to:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
  Returns: The result of a lexicographical comparison between t and
  u. For any two zero-length tuples e and f, e &lt; f returns false.
  Otherwise, the result is defined as: cmp( get&lt;0&gt;(t), get&lt;0&gt;(u)) ||
  (!cmp(get&lt;0&gt;(u), get&lt;0&gt;(t)) &amp;&amp; ttail &lt; utail), where rtail for some
  tuple r is a tuple containing all but the first element of r, and
  cmp(x,y) is an unspecified function template defined as follows.
</p>
<p>
  Where T is the type of x and U is the type of y:
</p>

<p>
     if T and U are pointer types and T is convertible to U, returns
     less&lt;U&gt;()(x,y)
</p>

<p>
     otherwise, if T and U are pointer types, returns less&lt;T&gt;()(x,y)
</p>

<p>
     otherwise, returns (bool)(x &lt; y)
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Berlin: This issue is much bigger than just tuple (pair, containers,
algorithms). Dietmar will survey and work up proposed wording.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.  This will be fixed with the next revision of concepts.
</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="536"></a>536. Container iterator constructor and explicit convertibility</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Joaqu�n M L�pez Mu�oz <b>Opened:</b> 2005-12-17 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#589">589</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The iterator constructor X(i,j) for containers as defined in 23.1.1 and
23.2.2 does only require that i and j be input iterators but
nothing is said about their associated value_type. There are three
sensible
options:
</p>
<ol>
<li>iterator's value_type is exactly X::value_type (modulo cv).</li>
<li>iterator's value_type is *implicitly* convertible to X::value_type.</li>
<li>iterator's value_type is *explicitly* convertible to X::value_type.</li>
</ol>
<p>
The issue has practical implications, and stdlib vendors have
taken divergent approaches to it: Dinkumware follows 2,
libstdc++ follows 3.
</p>
<p>
The same problem applies to the definition of insert(p,i,j) for
sequences and insert(i,j) for associative contianers, as well as
assign.
</p>

<p><i>[
The following added by Howard and the example code was originally written by
Dietmar.
]</i></p>

<p>
Valid code below?
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;vector&gt; 
#include &lt;iterator&gt; 
#include &lt;iostream&gt; 

struct foo 
{ 
    explicit foo(int) {} 
}; 

int main() 
{ 
    std::vector&lt;int&gt; v_int; 
    std::vector&lt;foo&gt; v_foo1(v_int.begin(), v_int.end()); 
    std::vector&lt;foo&gt; v_foo2((std::istream_iterator&lt;int&gt;(std::cin)), 
                             std::istream_iterator&lt;int&gt;()); 
} 
</pre></blockquote>
<p><i>[
Berlin: Some support, not universal, for respecting the explicit qualifier.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="544"></a>544. minor NULL problems in C.2</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> C.2 [diff.library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2005-11-25 <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#diff.library">issues</a> in [diff.library].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to C.2.2.3, p1, "the macro NULL, defined in any of &lt;clocale&gt;,
&lt;cstddef&gt;, &lt;cstdio&gt;, &lt;cstdlib&gt;, &lt;cstring&gt;, &lt;ctime&gt;,
or &lt;cwchar&gt;." This is consistent with the C standard.
</p>
<p>
However, Table 95 in C.2 fails to mention &lt;clocale&gt; and &lt;cstdlib&gt;.
</p>
<p>
In addition, C.2, p2 claims that "The C++ Standard library provides
54 standard macros from the C library, as shown in Table 95." While
table 95 does have 54 entries, since a couple of them (including the
NULL macro) are listed more than once, the actual number of macros
defined by the C++ Standard Library may not be 54.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
I propose we add &lt;clocale&gt; and &lt;cstdlib&gt; to Table 96 and remove the
number of macros from C.2, p2 and reword the sentence as follows:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The C++ Standard library <del>provides 54 standard macros from</del>
<ins>defines a number macros corresponding to those defined by</ins> the C 
<ins>Standard</ins> library, as shown in Table 96.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Portland:  Resolution is considered editorial.  It will be incorporated into the WD.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="546"></a>546. _Longlong and _ULonglong are integer types</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> TR1 5.1.1 [tr.rand.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-10 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The TR sneaks in two new integer types, _Longlong and _Ulonglong, in [tr.c99].
The rest of the TR should use that type.  I believe this affects two places.
First, the random number requirements, 5.1.1/10-11, lists all of the types with
which template parameters named IntType and UIntType may be instantiated.
_Longlong (or "long long", assuming it is added to C++0x) should be added to the
IntType list, and UIntType (again, or "unsigned long long") should be added to
the UIntType list.  Second, 6.3.2 lists the types for which hash&lt;&gt; is
required to be instantiable. _Longlong and _Ulonglong should be added to that
list, so that people may use long long as a hash key.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We are not going to fix TR1.
</p>
<p>
The paper "long long goes to the library" addresses the integration of
long long into the C++0x library.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="547"></a>547. division should be floating-point, not integer</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5 [rand], TR1 5.1 [tr.rand] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 10 describes how a variate generator uses numbers produced by an
engine to pass to a generator. The sentence that concerns me is: "Otherwise, if
the value for engine_value_type::result_type is true and the value for
Distribution::input_type is false [i.e. if the engine produces integers and the
engine wants floating-point values], then the numbers in s_eng are divided by
engine().max() - engine().min() + 1 to obtain the numbers in s_e." Since the
engine is producing integers, both the numerator and the denominator are
integers and we'll be doing integer division, which I don't think is what we
want. Shouldn't we be performing a conversion to a floating-point type first?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD as the affected section is now gone and so the issue is moot.
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2111.pdf">N2111</a>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="548"></a>548. May random_device block?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.6 [rand.device], TR1 5.1.6 [tr.rand.device] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#rand.device">issues</a> in [rand.device].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Class random_device "produces non-deterministic random numbers", using some
external source of entropy. In most real-world systems, the amount of available
entropy is limited. Suppose that entropy has been exhausted. What is an
implementation permitted to do? In particular, is it permitted to block
indefinitely until more random bits are available, or is the implementation
required to detect failure immediately? This is not an academic question. On
Linux a straightforward implementation would read from /dev/random, and "When
the entropy pool is empty, reads to /dev/random will block until additional
environmental noise is gathered." Programmers need to know whether random_device
is permitted to (or possibly even required to?) behave the same way.
</p>

<p><i>[
Berlin: Walter: N1932 considers this NAD. Does the standard specify whether std::cin
may block?
]</i></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> (NAD).
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="549"></a>549. Undefined variable in binomial_distribution</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8 [rand.dist], TR1 5.1.7.5 [tr.rand.dist.bin] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#rand.dist">issues</a> in [rand.dist].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 1 says that "A binomial distributon random distribution produces
integer values i&gt;0 with p(i) = (n choose i) * p*i * (1-p)^(t-i), where t and
p are the parameters of the distribution. OK, that tells us what t, p, and i
are. What's n?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Berlin: Typo: "n" replaced by "t" in N1932: see 26.3.7.2.2/1.
</p>

<p><i>[
Portland:  Subsumed by N2111.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="553"></a>553. very minor editorial change intptr_t / uintptr_t</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.4.1 [cstdint.syn], TR1 8.22.1 [tr.c99.cstdint.syn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-30 <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#cstdint.syn">issues</a> in [cstdint.syn].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In the synopsis, some types are identified as optional: int8_t, int16_t,
and so on, consistently with C99, indeed.
</p>
<p>
On the other hand, intptr_t and uintptr_t, are not marked as such and
probably should, consistently with C99, 7.18.1.4.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 18.4.1 [cstdint.syn]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>...
typedef <i>signed integer type</i> intptr_t;    <ins><i>// optional</i></ins>
...
typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uintptr_t;    <ins><i>// optional</i></ins>
...
</pre></blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Recommend NAD and fix as editorial with the proposed resolution.





<hr>
<h3><a name="554"></a>554. Problem with lwg DR 184 numeric_limits&lt;bool&gt;</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2006-01-29 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I believe we have a bug in the resolution of:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#184">lwg 184</a>
(WP status).
</p>

<p>
The resolution spells out each member of <tt>numeric_limits&lt;bool&gt;</tt>.
The part I'm having a little trouble with is:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>static const bool traps = false;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Should this not be implementation defined?  Given:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>int main()
{
     bool b1 = true;
     bool b2 = false;
     bool b3 = b1/b2;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
If this causes a trap, shouldn't <tt>numeric_limits&lt;bool&gt;::traps</tt> be
<tt>true</tt>?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 18.2.1.5p3:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
-3- The specialization for <tt>bool</tt> shall be provided as follows: </p>
<blockquote><pre>namespace std { 
   template &lt;&gt; class numeric_limits&lt;bool&gt; {
      ...
      static const bool traps = <del>false</del> <ins><i>implementation-defined</i></ins>;
      ...
   };
}
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Redmond:  NAD because traps refers to values, not operations.  There is no bool
value that will trap.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="555"></a>555. TR1, 8.21/1: typo</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> TR1 8.21 [tr.c99.boolh] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-02 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
This one, if nobody noticed it yet, seems really editorial:
s/cstbool/cstdbool/
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 8.21p1:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
-1- The header behaves as if it defines the additional macro defined in
<tt>&lt;cst<ins>d</ins>bool&gt;</tt> by including the header <tt>&lt;cstdbool&gt;</tt>.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Redmond:  Editorial.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="557"></a>557. TR1: div(_Longlong, _Longlong) vs div(intmax_t, intmax_t)</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-06 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I'm seeing a problem with such overloads: when, _Longlong == intmax_t ==
long long we end up, essentially, with the same arguments and different
return types (lldiv_t and imaxdiv_t, respectively). Similar issue with
abs(_Longlong) and abs(intmax_t), of course.
</p>
<p>
Comparing sections 8.25 and 8.11, I see an important difference,
however: 8.25.3 and 8.25.4 carefully describe div and abs for _Longlong
types (rightfully, because not moved over directly from C99), whereas
there is no equivalent in 8.11: the abs and div overloads for intmax_t
types appear only in the synopsis and are not described anywhere, in
particular no mention in 8.11.2 (at variance with 8.25.2).
</p>
<p>
I'm wondering whether we really, really, want div and abs for intmax_t...
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>



<p><i>[
Portland: no consensus.
]</i></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p><i>[
Batavia, Bill: The <tt>&lt;cstdint&gt;</tt> synopsis in TR1 8.11.1 [tr.c99.cinttypes.syn] contains:
]</i></p>

<blockquote><pre>intmax_t imaxabs(intmax_t i);
intmax_t abs(intmax_t i);

imaxdiv_t imaxdiv(intmax_t numer, intmax_t denom);
imaxdiv_t div(intmax_t numer, intmax_t denom);
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
and in TR1 8.11.2 [tr.c99.cinttypes.def]:
]</i></p>


<blockquote><p>
The header defines all functions, types, and macros the same as C99
subclause 7.8.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
This is as much definition as we give for most other C99 functions,
so nothing need change. We might, however, choose to add the footnote:
]</i></p>


<blockquote><p>
[<i>Note:</i> These overloads for <tt>abs</tt> and <tt>div</tt> may well be equivalent to
those that take <tt>long long</tt> arguments. If so, the implementation is
responsible for avoiding conflicting declarations. -- <i>end note</i>]
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Bellevue: NAD Editorial. Pete must add a footnote, as described below.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p><i>[
Looks like a real problem. Dietmar suggests div() return a template
type. Matt: looks like imaxdiv_t is loosly defined. Can it be a typedef
for lldiv_t when _Longlong == intmax_t? PJP seems to agree. We would
need a non-normative note declaring that the types lldiv_t and imaxdiv_t
may not be unique if intmax_t==_longlong.
]</i></p>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="558"></a>558. lib.input.iterators Defect</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<blockquote>
<p>
  24.1.1 Input iterators [lib.input.iterators]
</p>
<p>
  1 A class or a built-in type X satisfies the requirements of an
  input iterator for the value type T if the following expressions are
  valid, where U is the type of any specified member of type T, as
  shown in Table 73.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
There is no capital U used in table 73.  There is a lowercase u, but
that is clearly not meant to denote a member of type T.  Also, there's
no description in 24.1.1 of what lowercase a means.  IMO the above
should have been...Hah, a and b are already covered in 24.1/11, so maybe it
should have just been:
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 24.1.1p1:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
-1- A class or a built-in type <tt>X</tt> satisfies the requirements of an
input iterator for the value type <tt>T</tt> if the following expressions 
are valid<del>, where <tt>U</tt> is the type of any specified member of type
<tt>T</tt>,</del> as shown in Table 73.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Portland: Editorial.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="560"></a>560. User-defined allocators without default constructor</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sergey P. Derevyago <b>Opened:</b> 2006-02-17 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<h4>1. The essence of the problem.</h4>
<p>
User-defined allocators without default constructor are not explicitly
supported by the standard but they can be supported just like std::vector
supports elements without default constructor.
</p>
<p>
As a result, there exist implementations that work well with such allocators
and implementations that don't.
</p>

<h4>2. The cause of the problem.</h4>
<p>
1) The standard doesn't explicitly state this intent but it should. In
particular, 20.1.5p5 explicitly state the intent w.r.t. the allocator
instances that compare non-equal. So it can similarly state the intent w.r.t.
the user-defined allocators without default constructor.
</p>
<p>
2) Some container operations are obviously underspecified. In particular,
21.3.7.1p2 tells:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class charT, class traits, class Allocator&gt;
  basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt; operator+(
    const charT* lhs,
    const basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; rhs
  );
</pre>
<p>
Returns: <tt>basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;(lhs) + rhs</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
That leads to the basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;(lhs, Allocator()) call.
Obviously, the right requirement is:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
Returns: <tt>basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;(lhs, rhs.get_allocator()) + rhs</tt>.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
It seems like a lot of DRs can be submitted on this "Absent call to
get_allocator()" topic.
</p>

<h4>3. Proposed actions.</h4>
<p>
1) Explicitly state the intent to allow for user-defined allocators without
default constructor in 20.1.5 Allocator requirements.
</p>
<p>
2) Correct all the places, where a correct allocator object is available
through the get_allocator() call but default Allocator() gets passed instead.
</p>
<h4>4. Code sample.</h4>
<p>
Let's suppose that the following memory pool is available:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>class mem_pool {
      // ...
      void* allocate(size_t size);
      void deallocate(void* ptr, size_t size);
};
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
So the following allocator can be implemented via this pool:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>class stl_allocator {
      mem_pool&amp; pool;

 public:
      explicit stl_allocator(mem_pool&amp; mp) : pool(mp) {}
      stl_allocator(const stl_allocator&amp; sa) : pool(sa.pool) {}
      template &lt;class U&gt;
      stl_allocator(const stl_allocator&lt;U&gt;&amp; sa)  : pool(sa.get_pool()) {}
      ~stl_allocator() {}

      pointer allocate(size_type n, std::allocator&lt;void&gt;::const_pointer = 0)
      {
       return (n!=0) ? static_cast&lt;pointer&gt;(pool.allocate(n*sizeof(T))) : 0;
      }

      void deallocate(pointer p, size_type n)
      {
       if (n!=0) pool.deallocate(p, n*sizeof(T));
      }

      // ...
};
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Then the following code works well on some implementations and doesn't work on
another:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>typedef basic_string&lt;char, char_traits&lt;char&gt;, stl_allocator&lt;char&gt; &gt; 
  tl_string;
mem_pool mp;
tl_string s1("abc", stl_allocator&lt;int&gt;(mp));
printf("(%s)\n", ("def"+s1).c_str());
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
In particular, on some implementations the code can't be compiled without
default stl_allocator() constructor.
</p>
<p>
The obvious way to solve the compile-time problems is to intentionally define
a NULL pointer dereferencing default constructor
</p>
<blockquote><pre>stl_allocator() : pool(*static_cast&lt;mem_pool*&gt;(0)) {}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
in a hope that it will not be called. The problem is that it really gets
called by operator+(const char*, const string&amp;) under the current 21.3.7.1p2
wording.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.  <tt>operator+()</tt> with <tt>string</tt> already requires the desired
semantics of copying the allocator from one of the strings (<i>lhs</i> when there is a choice).
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="568"></a>568. log2 overloads missing</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> TR1 8.16.4 [tr.c99.cmath.over] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2006-03-07 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>log2</tt> is missing from the list of "additional overloads" in TR1 8.16.4 [tr.c99.cmath.over] p1.
</p>

<p>
Hinnant:  This is a TR1 issue only.  It is fixed in the current (N2135) WD.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree this has been fixed in the Working Draft.
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add <tt>log2</tt> to the list of functions in TR1 8.16.4 [tr.c99.cmath.over] p1.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="569"></a>569. Postcondition for basic_ios::clear(iostate) incorrectly stated</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Seungbeom Kim <b>Opened:</b> 2006-03-10 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#272">272</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Section: 27.4.4.3 [lib.iostate.flags]
</p>
<p>
Paragraph 4 says:
</p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><pre>void clear(iostate <i>state</i> = goodbit);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
<i>Postcondition:</i> If <tt>rdbuf()!=0</tt> then <tt><i>state</i> == rdstate();</tt>
otherwise <tt>rdstate()==<i>state</i>|ios_base::badbit</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
The postcondition "rdstate()==state|ios_base::badbit" is parsed as
"(rdstate()==state)|ios_base::badbit", which is probably what the
committee meant.
</p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="570"></a>570. Request adding additional explicit specializations of char_traits</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2 [char.traits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jack Reeves <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-06 <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#char.traits">issues</a> in [char.traits].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Currently, the Standard Library specifies only a declaration for template class
char_traits&lt;&gt; and requires the implementation provide two explicit
specializations: char_traits&lt;char&gt; and char_traits&lt;wchar_t&gt;. I feel the Standard
should require explicit specializations for all built-in character types, i.e.
char, wchar_t, unsigned char, and signed char.
</p>
<p>
I have put together a paper
(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1985.htm">N1985</a>)
that describes this in more detail and
includes all the necessary wording.
</p>
<p><i>[
Portland: Jack will rewrite
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1985.htm">N1985</a>
to propose a primary template that will work with other integral types.
]</i></p>

<p><i>[
Toronto: issue has grown with addition of <tt>char16_t</tt> and <tt>char32_t</tt>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
post Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We suggest that Jack be asked about the status of his paper, and if it
is not forthcoming, the work-item be assigned to someone else. If no one
steps forward to do the paper before the next meeting, we propose to
make this NAD without further discussion. We leave this Open for now,
but our recommendation is NAD.
</p>
<p>
Note: the issue statement should be updated, as the Toronto comment has
already been resolved. E.g., char_traits specializations for char16_t
and char32_t are now in the working paper.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Nobody has submitted the requested paper, so we move to NAD, as suggested by the decision at the last meeting.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="571"></a>571. Update C90 references to C99?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 1.2 [intro.refs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-08 <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#intro.refs">issues</a> in [intro.refs].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
1.2 Normative references [intro.refs] of the WP currently refers to ISO/IEC
9899:1990, Programming languages - C. Should that be changed to ISO/IEC
9899:1999?
</p>
<p>
What impact does this have on the library?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 1.2/1 [intro.refs] of the WP, change:
</p>
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>ISO/IEC 9899:<del>1990</del><ins>1999 + TC1 + TC2</ins>, <i>Programming languages - C</i></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Recommend NAD, fixed editorially.





<hr>
<h3><a name="572"></a>572. Oops, we gave 507 WP status</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5 [rand], TR1 5.1 [tr.rand] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-11 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In Berlin, as a working group, we voted in favor of N1932 which makes issue 507 moot:
variate_generator has been eliminated.  Then in full committee we voted to give
this issue WP status (mistakenly).
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Strike the proposed resolution of issue 507.
</p>
<p><i>[
post-Portland:  Walter and Howard recommend NAD.  The proposed resolution of 507 no longer
exists in the current WD.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
NAD.  Will be moot once
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2135.pdf">N2135</a>
is adopted.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="573"></a>573. C++0x file positioning should handle modern file sizes</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-12 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There are two deficiencies related to file sizes:
</p>
<ol>
<li>It doesn't appear that the Standard Library is specified in
      a way that handles modern file sizes, which are often too
      large to be represented by an unsigned long.</li>

<li>The std::fpos class does not currently have the ability to
      set/get file positions.</li>
</ol>
<p>
The Dinkumware implementation of the Standard Library as shipped with the Microsoft compiler copes with these issues by:
</p>
<ol type="A">
<li>Defining fpos_t be long long, which is large enough to
      represent any file position likely in the foreseeable future.</li>

<li>Adding member functions to class fpos. For example,
<blockquote><pre>fpos_t seekpos() const;
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
<p>
Because there are so many types relating to file positions and offsets (fpos_t,
fpos, pos_type, off_type, streamoff, streamsize, streampos, wstreampos, and
perhaps more), it is difficult to know if the Dinkumware extensions are
sufficient. But they seem a useful starting place for discussions, and they do
represent existing practice.
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): We need a paper. It would be nice if someone proposed
clarifications to the definitions of <tt>pos_type</tt> and <tt>off_type</tt>. Currently
these definitions are horrible. Proposed Disposition: Open
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is the subject of paper N2926.
</p>
<p>
If we choose to take any action, we will move the paper, so the issue can be closed.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="579"></a>579. erase(iterator) for unordered containers should not return an iterator</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Joaqu�n M L�pez Mu�oz <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-13 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
See
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2023.pdf">N2023</a>
for full discussion.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-12-11 Paolo opens:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I'm asking for DR 579 to be re-opened, basing on recent discussions on the
library reflector, see Message c++std-lib-26040 and replies.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-02-07 Paolo updates wording.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
As pointed out by Chris in c++std-lib-26040, that an
<tt>erase(unordered_container, iterator)</tt> returning an <tt>iterator</tt> can
easily implemented in user code, if needed; that actually returning an
<tt>iterator</tt> costs nothing for the overload taking two <tt>iterator</tt>s,
thus that proposed change is only for consistency; that
<tt>forward_list::erase_after</tt> also returns <tt>void</tt> (for different
reasons, granted, but isn't that any "<tt>erase</tt>" function in the containers
uniformly returns an <tt>iterator</tt>); that, also in thread started by Chris'
message, Alberto pointed out that the proxy idea isn't a good one; that users
both of the GNU and Boost implementations are reporting serious performance
problems with the current version returning an <tt>iterator</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-02-07 Original wording saved here:
]</i></p>


<blockquote class="note">
<p>
Option 1:
</p>

<p>
The problem can be eliminated by omitting the requirement that <tt>a.erase(q)</tt> return an 
iterator. This is, however, in contrast with the equivalent requirements for other 
standard containers.
</p>

<p>
Option 2:
</p>

<p>
<tt>a.erase(q)</tt> can be made to compute the next iterator only when explicitly requested: 
the technique consists in returning a proxy object implicitly convertible to <tt>iterator</tt>, so 
that
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator q1=a.erase(q);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
works as expected, while
</p>

<blockquote><pre>a.erase(q);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
does not ever invoke the conversion-to-iterator operator, thus avoiding the associated 
computation. To allow this technique, some sections of TR1 along the line "return value 
is an iterator..." should be changed to "return value is an unspecified object implicitly 
convertible to an iterator..." Although this trick is expected to work transparently, it can 
have some collateral effects when the expression <tt>a.erase(q)</tt> is used inside generic 
code.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-03-27 Joaqu�n adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Signature of <tt>iterator erase(const_iterator)</tt> should be changed to <tt>void
erase(const_iterator)</tt>. If this is not viable an acceptable tradeoff
could be to make the return type of <tt>erase(const_iterator)</tt>
<i>implementation defined</i>.
</p>

<p>
The standard should allow implementations of unordered associative
containers using either singly or doubly linked lists.
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2023.pdf">N2023</a>
proves that singly-linked lists implementations cannot provide the required
complexity for <tt>iterator erase(const_iterator)</tt>. Thus, some action is
needed to allow both implementations.
</p>

<p> 
Option 1: Changing the required complexity from O(1) to O(log n). This option
merely masks a design flaw. Users are forcefully penalized for what they don't
use (the returned iterator). Besides, they would have to learn about the
pathological (yet very real) situations where using <tt>erase</tt> can lead to
quadratic performance. Two out of these three objections remain even if some
alternative member function like <tt>void quick_erase(const_iterator)</tt> is
thrown in to the interface.
</p>

<p> 
Some objections have been expressed to changing return type of <tt>erase</tt> to
<tt>void</tt>, arguing that it would break current existing practice with
standard library implementations based on doubly-linked lists, where the problem
does not occur. However implementations based on drafts should not block the
resolution of a serious design issue, more so when the issue will hurt future
users of C++, as it's happening already.
</p>

<p> 
Option 2: Make <tt>erase</tt> return type <i>implementation defined</i>. There's
a possible tradeoff with the objectors above consisting in changing the
signature to <i>implementation defined</i> <tt>erase(iterator)</tt>, so that
returning an iterator is indeed a valid extension. To this it can be argued that
this would make implementantions returning an iterator look as somehow promoting
proprietary extensions: this in my opinion is not a valid argument since those
implementations are <em>already</em> extending the required interface by
providing bidirectional iterators (just forward iterators are required).
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The issue was lengthy discussed and implementation experience was demonstrated that a non-void return
type is implementable for both single-linked and double-linked lists without loss of efficiency.
</p>

<p>
By a 12-1-1-0 poll voted to keep the return type of erase as <tt>iterator</tt> instead of 
<tt>void</tt> and a second 0-0-3-10 poll rejected the additional proposal to add a 
<tt>quick_erase</tt> returning <tt>void</tt>, thus LWG decided for NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>

<p>
No consensus for a change.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="580"></a>580. unused allocator members</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-14 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#479">479</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
        <p>

C++ Standard Library  templates that take an allocator  as an argument
are    required    to    call    the    <code>allocate()</code>    and
<code>deallocate()</code>  members of the  allocator object  to obtain
storage.  However, they do not appear to be required to call any other
allocator      members      such     as      <code>construct()</code>,
<code>destroy()</code>,           <code>address()</code>,          and
<code>max_size()</code>.  This makes these allocator members less than
useful in portable programs.

        </p>
        <p>

It's unclear to me whether the absence of the requirement to use these
allocator  members  is  an  unintentional  omission  or  a  deliberate
choice. However,  since the functions exist in  the standard allocator
and  since  they are  required  to  be  provided by  any  user-defined
allocator I  believe the standard  ought to be clarified  to explictly
specify  whether programs  should or  should not  be able  to  rely on
standard containers calling the functions.

        </p>
        <p>

I  propose  that all  containers  be required  to  make  use of  these
functions.

        </p>
<p><i>[
Batavia:  We support this resolution.  Martin to provide wording.
]</i></p>

<p><i>[
pre-Oxford:  Martin provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-04-28 Pablo adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2554.pdf">N2554</a>
(scoped allocators),
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2768.pdf">N2768</a>
(allocator concepts), and
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2810.pdf">N2810</a>
(allocator defects), address all of these points EXCEPT <tt>max_size()</tt>.
So, I would add a note to that affect and re-class the defect as belonging
to section 23.2.1 [container.requirements.general].
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The comment in the description of this issue that this "would be"
rendered editorial by the adoption of N2257 is confusing. It appears
that N2257 was never adopted.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  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>

Specifically, I propose to change 23.2 [container.requirements],
p9 as follows:

       </p>
           <blockquote>
<p>
-9- Copy constructors  for all container types defined  in this clause
<ins>that   are  parametrized  on   <code>Allocator</code></ins>  copy
<del>an</del><ins>the</ins>  allocator argument from  their respective
first parameters.

All other  constructors for  these container types  take a<del>n</del>
<ins>const</ins>  <code>Allocator&amp;</code>  argument  (20.1.6),  an
allocator whose <code>value_type</code> is the same as the container's
<code>value_type</code>.

A copy of this  argument <del>is</del><ins>shall be</ins> used for any
memory  allocation <ins> and  deallocation</ins> performed<del>,</del>
by these  constructors and by all  member functions<del>,</del> during
the  lifetime  of each  container  object.   <ins>Allocation shall  be
performed  "as  if"  by  calling  the  <code>allocate()</code>  member
function on  a copy  of the allocator  object of the  appropriate type
<sup>New  Footnote)</sup>,   and  deallocation  "as   if"  by  calling
<code>deallocate()</code> on  a copy of  the same allocator  object of
the corresponding type.</ins>

<ins>A  copy of  this argument  shall also  be used  to  construct and
destroy objects whose lifetime  is managed by the container, including
but not  limited to those of  the container's <code>value_type</code>,
and  to  obtain  their  address.   All  objects  residing  in  storage
allocated by a  container's allocator shall be constructed  "as if" by
calling the <code>construct()</code> member  function on a copy of the
allocator object of  the appropriate type.  The same  objects shall be
destroyed "as if"  by calling <code>destroy()</code> on a  copy of the
same allocator object  of the same type.  The  address of such objects
shall be obtained "as if" by calling the <code>address()</code> member
function  on  a  copy  of  the allocator  object  of  the  appropriate
type.</ins>

<ins>Finally, a copy  of this argument shall be  used by its container
object to determine  the maximum number of objects  of the container's
<code>value_type</code> the container may  store at the same time. The
container  member function <code>max_size()</code> obtains  this number
from      the      value      returned      by     a      call      to
<code>get_allocator().max_size()</code>.</ins>

In   all  container   types  defined   in  this   clause <ins>that  are
parametrized     on    <code>Allocator</code></ins>,     the    member
<code>get_allocator()</code>     returns     a     copy     of     the
<code>Allocator</code>     object     used     to    construct     the
container.<sup>258)</sup>
</p>
<p>
New Footnote: This type  may be different from <code>Allocator</code>:
it     may    be     derived    from     <code>Allocator</code>    via
<code>Allocator::rebind&lt;U&gt;::other</code>   for  the  appropriate
type <code>U</code>.
</p>
           </blockquote>
       <p>

The proposed wording seems cumbersome but I couldn't think of a better
way   to  describe   the   requirement  that   containers  use   their
<code>Allocator</code>  to manage  only objects  (regardless  of their
type)  that  persist  over  their  lifetimes  and  not,  for  example,
temporaries  created on the  stack. That  is, containers  shouldn't be
required  to  call  <code>Allocator::construct(Allocator::allocate(1),
elem)</code>  just to  construct a  temporary copy  of an  element, or
<code>Allocator::destroy(Allocator::address(temp),     1)</code>    to
destroy temporaries.

       </p>


<p><i>[
Howard: This same paragraph will need some work to accommodate <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#431">431</a>.
]</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="582"></a>582. specialized algorithms and volatile storage</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#uninitialized.copy">issues</a> in [uninitialized.copy].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</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#1029">1029</a></p>
        <p>

The specialized  algorithms [lib.specialized.algorithms] are specified
as having the general effect of invoking the following expression:

        </p>
            <pre>
new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(&amp;*i))
    typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::value_type (x)

            </pre>
        <p>

This  expression is  ill-formed  when the  type  of the  subexpression
<code>&amp;*i</code> is some volatile-qualified <code>T</code>.

        </p>

<p><i>[
Batavia:  Lack of support for proposed resolution but agree there is a
defect.  Howard to look at wording.  Concern that move semantics
properly expressed if iterator returns rvalue.
]</i></p>



<p><i>[
2009-06-17 Pablo adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>

<p>Propose that Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#582">582</a> be closed NAD.</p>
<p>
Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#582">582</a> asks that <tt>uninitialized_copy</tt>,
<tt>uninitialized_fill</tt>, and <tt>uninitialized_fill_n</tt> should be
well-formed if the result type is volatile.  My feeling is that the
standard does not, and should not, guarantee any useful behavior when
constructors are invoked on volatile storage, so making it syntactically
legal to call <tt>uninitialized_copy</tt> on volatile storage is not useful. A
possible editorial change would be to put my previous sentence into a
non-normative note.
</p>
<p>
Note that the three sections starting with 20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy] do not
yet have concepts.  Here's a first crack at the first one:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;InputIterator InIter, OutputIterator OutIter&gt;
requires ExplicitConvertible&lt;HasDereference&lt;OutIter::reference&gt;::result,
                             OutIter::value_type&amp;&gt;
      &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;OutIter::value_type*, void*&gt;
      &amp;&amp; ExplicitConvertible&lt;OutIter::value_type, InIter::reference&gt;
  OutIter uninitialized_copy(InIter first, InIter last, OutIter result);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
Effects:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>while (first != last) {
  typedef OutIter::value_type value_type;
  value_type&amp; outRef = static_cast&lt;value_type&amp;&gt;(*result++);
  ::new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(addressof(outRef))) value_type(*first++);
}
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Notes:
</p>
<ol>
<li>This definition is actually LESS constrained than in C++03 because
there is no requirement that the result be a forward iterator.
</li>
<li>
If
OutIter returns a proxy type with an overloaded operator&amp;, this
definition probably won't compile.  Lifting this limitation while
allowing value_type to have an overloaded operator&amp; would be hard, but
is probably possible with careful overloading.  I'm not sure it's worth
it.
</li>
<li>
This definition retains the prohibition on the use of volatile types for the result.
</li>
</ol>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We don't deal with volatile in the library.
</p>
<p>
Jim: should we state that explicitly somewhere?
</p>
<p>
Beman: you might argue that clause 17 should say something about
volatile. However, if you want to raise we argument, we should open it
as a separate issue and consult with experts on concurrency.
</p>
<p>
Hinnant: actually, some library components do handle volatile, so we'd
need to be very careful about what we say in clause 17.
</p>
<p>
No objection to NAD.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

    

    <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
        <p>

In order  to allow these algorithms  to operate on  volatile storage I
propose to change the expression so as to make it well-formed even for
pointers  to volatile  types.  Specifically,  I propose  the following
changes to clauses 20 and 24. Change 20.6.4.1, p1 to read:

        </p>
            <pre>
<i>Effects</i>:

typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::pointer    pointer;
typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::value_type value_type;

for (; first != last; ++result, ++first)
    new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(const_cast&lt;pointer&gt;(&amp;*result))
        value_type (*first);

            </pre>
        <p>

change 20.6.4.2, p1 to read

        </p>
            <pre>
<i>Effects</i>:

typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::pointer    pointer;
typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::value_type value_type;

for (; first != last; ++result, ++first)
    new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(const_cast&lt;pointer&gt;(&amp;*first))
        value_type (*x);

            </pre>
        <p>

and change 20.6.4.3, p1 to read

        </p>
            <pre>
<i>Effects</i>:

typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::pointer    pointer;
typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::value_type value_type;

for (; n--; ++first)
    new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(const_cast&lt;pointer&gt;(&amp;*first))
        value_type (*x);

            </pre>
        <p>

In   addition,  since   there   is  no   partial  specialization   for
<code>iterator_traits&lt;volatile T*&gt;</code>  I propose to  add one
to parallel such specialization  for &lt;const T*&gt;. Specifically, I
propose to add the following text to the end of 24.3.1, p3:

        </p>
        <p>

and for pointers to volatile as 

        </p>
            <pre>
namespace std {
template&lt;class T&gt; struct iterator_traits&lt;volatile T*&gt; {
typedef ptrdiff_t difference_type;
typedef T value_type;
typedef volatile T* pointer;
typedef volatile T&amp; reference;
typedef random_access_iterator_tag iterator_category;
};
}

            </pre>
        <p>

Note that  the change to  <code>iterator_traits</code> isn't necessary
in order to implement the  specialized algorithms in a way that allows
them to operate on volatile  strorage. It is only necesassary in order
to specify  their effects in terms  of <code>iterator_traits</code> as
is  done here.   Implementations can  (and some  do) achieve  the same
effect by means of function template overloading.

        </p>
    



<hr>
<h3><a name="583"></a>583. div() for unsigned integral types</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-15 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There is no div() function for unsigned integer types.
</p>
<p>
There are several possible resolutions.  The simplest one is noted below.  Other
possibilities include a templated solution.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to 26.7 [lib.c.math] paragraph 8:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>struct udiv_t div(unsigned, unsigned);
struct uldiv_t div(unsigned long, unsigned long);
struct ulldiv_t div(unsigned long long, unsigned long long);
</pre></blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Toronto:  C99 does not have these unsigned versions because
the signed version exist just to define the implementation-defined behavior
of signed integer division.  Unsigned integer division has no implementation-defined
behavior and thus does not need this treatment.





<hr>
<h3><a name="584"></a>584. missing int pow(int,int) functionality</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-15 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There is no pow() function for any integral type.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add something like:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt; typename T&gt;
T power( T x, int n );
// requires: n &gt;=0
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Toronto:  We already have double pow(integral, integral) from 26.8 [c.math] p11.





<hr>
<h3><a name="585"></a>585. facet error reporting</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor, Paolo Carlini <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
        <p>

Section  22.2, paragraph 2  requires facet  <code>get()</code> members
that    take    an    <code>ios_base::iostate&amp;</code>    argument,
<code><i>err</i></code>,  to   ignore  the  (initial)   value  of  the
argument, but to set it to <code>ios_base::failbit</code> in case of a
parse error.

        </p>
        <p>

We  believe  there  are  a   few  minor  problems  with  this  blanket
requirement  in   conjunction  with   the  wording  specific   to  each
<code>get()</code> member function.

        </p>
        <p>

First,  besides <code>get()</code>  there are  other  member functions
with     a      slightly     different     name      (for     example,
<code>get_date()</code>). It's not completely clear that the intent of
the  paragraph  is  to  include  those  as  well,  and  at  least  one
implementation has interpreted the requirement literally.

        </p>
        <p>

Second,    the     requirement    to    "set     the    argument    to
<code>ios_base::failbit</code>  suggests that  the  functions are  not
permitted    to   set    it   to    any   other    value    (such   as
<code>ios_base::eofbit</code>,   or   even  <code>ios_base::eofbit   |
ios_base::failbit</code>).

        </p>
        <p>

However, 22.2.2.1.2, p5 (Stage  3 of <code>num_get</code> parsing) and
p6 (<code>bool</code> parsing)  specifies that the <code>do_get</code>
functions  perform <code><i>err</i> |=  ios_base::eofbit</code>, which
contradicts  the earlier  requirement to  ignore  <i>err</i>'s initial
value.

        </p>
        <p>

22.2.6.1.2,  p1  (the  Effects  clause of  the  <code>money_get</code>
facet's  <code>do_get</code>  member  functions) also  specifies  that
<code><i>err</i></code>'s initial  value be used to  compute the final
value  by  ORing  it  with  either  <code>ios_base::failbit</code>  or
with<code>ios_base::eofbit | ios_base::failbit</code>.

        </p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>

    

    <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
        <p>

We believe the  intent is for all facet member  functions that take an
<code>ios_base::iostate&amp;</code> argument to:

        </p>
            <ul>
                <li>

ignore the initial value of the <code><i>err</i></code> argument,

                </li>
                <li>

reset <code><i>err</i></code>  to <code>ios_base::goodbit</code> prior
to any further processing,

                </li>
                <li>

and       set      either       <code>ios_base::eofbit</code>,      or
<code>ios_base::failbit</code>, or both in <code><i>err</i></code>, as
appropriate,  in response  to  reaching the  end-of-file  or on  parse
error, or both.

                </li>
            </ul>
        <p>

To that effect we propose to change 22.2, p2 as follows:

        </p>
        <p>

The  <i>put</i><del>()</del>  members  make  no  provision  for  error
reporting.   (Any  failures of  the  OutputIterator  argument must  be
extracted   from  the   returned  iterator.)    <ins>Unless  otherwise
specified, </ins>the <i>get</i><del>()</del>  members  <ins>that</ins>
take an  <code>ios_base::iostate&amp;</code> argument <del>whose value
they  ignore,  but  set  to  ios_base::failbit  in  case  of  a  parse
error.</del><ins>,   <code><i>err</i></code>,   start  by   evaluating
<code>err  =   ios_base::goodbit</code>,  and  may   subsequently  set
<i>err</i>     to     either     <code>ios_base::eofbit</code>,     or
<code>ios_base::failbit</code>,     or     <code>ios_base::eofbit    |
ios_base::failbit</code> in response to reaching the end-of-file or in
case of a parse error, or both, respectively.</ins>

        </p>
    
    
<p><i>[
Kona (2007): We need to change the proposed wording to clarify that the
phrase "the get members" actually denotes <tt>get()</tt>, <tt>get_date()</tt>, etc.
Proposed Disposition: Open
]</i></p>




<hr>
<h3><a name="587"></a>587. iststream ctor missing description</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> D.9.2.1 [depr.istrstream.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-22 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
        <p>

The  <code>iststream(char*, streamsize)</code>  ctor is  in  the class
synopsis  in D.7.2  but its  signature is  missing in  the description
below (in D.7.2.1).

        </p>
    

    <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
        <p>

This seems like a simple editorial issue and the missing signature can
be added to the one for <code>const char*</code> in paragraph 2.

        </p>

<p><i>[
post Oxford: Noted that it is already fixed in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2284.pdf">N2284</a>
]</i></p>


    



<hr>
<h3><a name="588"></a>588. requirements on zero sized tr1::arrays and other details</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Gennaro Prota <b>Opened:</b> 2006-07-18 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The wording used for section 23.2.1 [lib.array] seems to be subtly
ambiguous about zero sized arrays (N==0). Specifically:
</p>
<p>
* "An instance of array&lt;T, N&gt; stores N elements of type T, so that
[...]"
</p>
<p>
Does this imply that a zero sized array object stores 0 elements, i.e.
that it cannot store any element of type T? The next point clarifies
the rationale behind this question, basically how to implement begin()
and end():
</p>
<p>
* 23.2.1.5 [lib.array.zero], p2: "In the case that N == 0, begin() ==
end() == unique value."
</p>
<p>
What does "unique" mean in this context? Let's consider the following
possible implementations, all relying on a partial specialization:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>a)
    template&lt; typename T &gt;
    class array&lt; T, 0 &gt; {
    
        ....

        iterator begin()
        { return iterator( reinterpret_cast&lt; T * &gt;( this ) ); }
        ....

    };
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
This has been used in boost, probably intending that the return value
had to be unique to the specific array object and that array couldn't
store any T. Note that, besides relying on a reinterpret_cast, has
(more than potential) alignment problems.
</p>
<blockquote><pre>b)
    template&lt; typename T &gt;
    class array&lt; T, 0 &gt; {
    
        T t;

        iterator begin()
        { return iterator( &amp;t ); }
        ....

    };
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
This provides a value which is unique to the object and to the type of
the array, but requires storing a T. Also, it would allow the user to
mistakenly provide an initializer list with one element.
</p>
<p>
A slight variant could be returning *the* null pointer of type T
</p>
<blockquote><pre>    return static_cast&lt;T*&gt;(0);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
In this case the value would be unique to the type array&lt;T, 0&gt; but not
to the objects (all objects of type array&lt;T, 0&gt; with the same value
for T would yield the same pointer value).
</p>
<p>
Furthermore this is inconsistent with what the standard requires from
allocation functions (see library issue 9).
</p>
<p>
c) same as above but with t being a static data member; again, the
value would be unique to the type, not to the object.
</p>
<p>
d) to avoid storing a T *directly* while disallowing the possibility
to use a one-element initializer list a non-aggregate nested class
could be defined
</p>
<blockquote><pre>    struct holder { holder() {} T t; } h;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
and then begin be defined as
</p>
<blockquote><pre> iterator begin() { return &amp;h.t; }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
But then, it's arguable whether the array stores a T or not.
Indirectly it does.
</p>
<p>
-----------------------------------------------------
</p>
<p>
Now, on different issues:
</p>
<p>
* what's the effect of calling assign(T&amp;) on a zero-sized array? There
seems to be only mention of front() and back(), in 23.2.1 [lib.array]
p4 (I would also suggest to move that bullet to section 23.2.1.5
[lib.array.zero], for locality of reference)
</p>
<p>
* (minor) the opening paragraph of 23.2.1 [lib.array] wording is a bit
inconsistent with that of other sequences: that's not a problem in
itself, but compare it for instance with "A vector is a kind of
sequence that supports random access iterators"; though the intent is
obvious one might argue that the wording used for arrays doesn't tell
what an array is, and relies on the reader to infer that it is what
the &lt;array&gt; header defines.
</p>
<p>
* it would be desiderable to have a static const data member of type
std::size_t, with value N, for usage as integral constant expression
</p>
<p>
* section 23.1 [lib.container.requirements] seem not to consider
fixed-size containers at all, as it says: "[containers] control
allocation and deallocation of these objects [the contained objects]
through constructors, destructors, *insert and erase* operations"
</p>
<p>
* max_size() isn't specified: the result is obvious but, technically,
it relies on table 80: "size() of the largest possible container"
which, again, doesn't seem to consider fixed size containers
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-29 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<ol type="a">
<li>
<p>
star bullet 1 ("what's the effect of calling <tt>assign(T&amp;)</tt> on a
zero-sized array?[..]");
</p>
<blockquote>
<tt>assign</tt> has been renamed to <tt>fill</tt> and the semantic of <tt>fill</tt> is now
defined in terms of
the free algorithm <tt>fill_n</tt>, which is well-defined for this situation.
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
star bullet 3 ("it would be desiderable to have a static const data
member..."):
</p>
<blockquote>
It seems that <tt>tuple_size&lt;array&lt;T, N&gt; &gt;::value</tt> as of 23.3.1.8 [array.tuple] does
provide this functionality now.
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair to address by the next meeting, or declare NAD.
</p>
<p>
Moved to Tentatively NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><i>[
Kona (2007): requirements on zero sized <tt>tr1::array</tt>s and other details
Issue 617: <tt>std::array</tt> is a sequence that doesn't satisfy the sequence
requirements? Alisdair will prepare a paper. Proposed Disposition: Open
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="590"></a>590. Type traits implementation latitude should be removed for C++0x</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.7 [meta], TR1 4.9 [tr.meta.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2006-08-10 <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">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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
20.4.9 [lib.meta.req], Implementation requirements, provides latitude for type
traits implementers that is not needed in C++0x. It includes the wording:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
[<i>Note:</i> the latitude granted to implementers in this clause is temporary,
and is expected to be removed in future revisions of this document. -- <i>end note</i>]
</p></blockquote>

<p>
Note:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2157.html">N2157: Minor Modifications to the type traits Wording</a>
also has the intent of removing this wording from the WP.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Remove 20.4.9 [lib.meta.req] in its entirety from the WP.
</p>

<p><i>[
post-Oxford: Recommend NAD Editorial.  This resolution is now in the
current working draft.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="591"></a>591. Misleading "built-in</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> whyglinux <b>Opened:</b> 2006-08-08 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
18.2.1.2 numeric_limits members [lib.numeric.limits.members]
Paragraph 7:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
"For built-in integer types, the number of non-sign bits in the
representation."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
26.1 Numeric type requirements [lib.numeric.requirements]
Footnote:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"In other words, value types. These include built-in arithmetic types,
pointers, the library class complex, and instantiations of valarray for
value types."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
Integer types (which are bool, char, wchar_t, and the signed and
unsigned integer types) and arithmetic types (which are integer and
floating types) are all built-in types and thus there are no
non-built-in (that is, user-defined) integer or arithmetic types. Since
the redundant "built-in" in the above 2 sentences can mislead that
there may be built-in or user-defined integer and arithmetic types
(which is not correct), the "built-in" should be removed.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
18.2.1.2 numeric_limits members [lib.numeric.limits.members]
Paragraph 7:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
"For <del>built-in</del> integer types, the number of non-sign bits in the
representation."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
26.1 Numeric type requirements [lib.numeric.requirements]
Footnote:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"In other words, value types. These include <del>built-in</del> arithmetic types,
pointers, the library class complex, and instantiations of valarray for
value types."
</p></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD / Editorial.  The proposed resolution is accepted as editorial.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="592"></a>592. Incorrect treatment of rdbuf()-&gt;close() return type</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Kohlhoff <b>Opened:</b> 2006-08-17 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I just spotted a minor problem in 27.8.1.7
[lib.ifstream.members] para 4 and also 27.8.1.13
[lib.fstream.members] para 4. In both places it says:
</p>
<blockquote>
<pre>void close();
</pre>
<p>
Effects: Calls rdbuf()-&gt;close() and, if that function returns false, ...
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
However, basic_filebuf::close() (27.8.1.2) returns a pointer to the
filebuf on success, null on failure, so I think it is meant to
say "if that function returns a null pointer". Oddly, it is
correct for basic_ofstream.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members], p5:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<i>Effects:</i> Calls <tt>rdbuf()-&gt;close()</tt> and, if that function
<ins>fails (</ins>returns <del><tt>false</tt></del> <ins>a null pointer)</ins>,
calls <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt> (which may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt>
(27.4.4.3)).
</p></blockquote>

<p>
Change 27.9.1.17 [fstream.members], p5:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<i>Effects:</i> Calls <tt>rdbuf()-&gt;close()</tt> and, if that function
<ins>fails (</ins>returns <del><tt>false</tt></del> <ins>a null pointer)</ins>,
calls <tt>setstate(failbit)</tt> (which may throw <tt>ios_base::failure</tt>
(27.4.4.3)).
</p></blockquote>



<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Proposed Disposition: NAD, Editorial
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="597"></a>597. Decimal: The notion of 'promotion' cannot be emulated by user-defined types.</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daveed Vandevoorde <b>Opened:</b> 2006-04-05 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In a private email, Daveed writes:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
I am not familiar with the C TR, but my guess is that the
class type approach still won't match a built-in type
approach because the notion of "promotion" cannot be
emulated by user-defined types.
</p>
<p>
Here is an example:
</p>
</blockquote>
<pre>
         struct S {
           S(_Decimal32 const&amp;);  // Converting constructor
         };
         void f(S);

         void f(_Decimal64);

         void g(_Decimal32 d) {
           f(d);
         }
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
If _Decimal32 is a built-in type, the call f(d) will likely
resolve to f(_Decimal64) because that requires only a
promotion, whereas f(S) requires a user-defined conversion.
</p>
<p>
If _Decimal32 is a class type, I think the call f(d) will be
ambiguous because both the conversion to _Decimal64 and the
conversion to S will be user-defined conversions with neither
better than the other.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
Robert comments:
</p>
<p>
In general, a library of arithmetic types cannot exactly emulate the behavior of the intrinsic numeric types.  There are several ways to tell whether an implementation of the decimal types uses compiler intrinisics or a library.  For example:
</p>
<pre>                 _Decimal32 d1;
                 d1.operator+=(5);  // If d1 is a builtin type, this won't compile.
</pre>
<p>
In preparing the decimal TR, we have three options:
</p>
<ol>
<li>require that the decimal types be class types</li>
<li>require that the decimal types be builtin types, like float and double</li>
<li>specify a library of class types, but allow enough implementor latitude that a conforming implementation could instead provide builtin types</li>
</ol>
<p>
We decided as a group to pursue option #3, but that approach implies that implementations may not agree on the semantics of certain use cases (first example, above), or on whether certain other cases are well-formed (second example).  Another potentially important problem is that, under the present definition of POD, the decimal classes are not POD types, but builtins will be.
</p>
<p>
Note that neither example above implies any problems with respect to C-to-C++ compatibility, since neither example can be expressed in C.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Decimal numeric types may either be builtin types or library types. We
only intend to specify the common subset of behaviors of the two
implementation approaches. The front matter of the Decimal TR says this
explicitly.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="606"></a>606. Decimal: allow narrowing conversions</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2006-06-15 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In c++std-lib-17205, Martin writes:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
...was it a deliberate design choice to make narrowing assignments ill-formed while permitting narrowing compound assignments?  For instance:
</p></blockquote>
<pre>      decimal32 d32;
      decimal64 d64;

      d32 = 64;     // error
      d32 += 64;    // okay
</pre>
<p>
In c++std-lib-17229, Robert responds:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
It is a vestige of an old idea that I forgot to remove from the paper.  Narrowing assignments should be permitted.  The bug is that the converting constructors that cause narrowing should not be explicit.  Thanks for pointing this out.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The current state of the Decimal TR is the result of a deliberate design
decision that has been examined many times.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
1.  In "3.2.2 Class <code>decimal32</code>" synopsis, remove the <code>explicit</code> specifier from the narrowing conversions:
</p>
<pre>                // <i>3.2.2.2 conversion from floating-point type:</i>
                <del>explicit</del> decimal32(decimal64 <i>d64</i>);
                <del>explicit</del> decimal32(decimal128 <i>d128</i>);
</pre>
<p>
2.  Do the same thing in "3.2.2.2. Conversion from floating-point type."
</p>
<p>
3.  In "3.2.3 Class <code>decimal64</code>" synopsis, remove the <code>explicit</code> specifier from the narrowing conversion:
</p>
<pre>                // <i>3.2.3.2 conversion from floating-point type:</i>
                <del>explicit</del> decimal64(decimal128 <i>d128</i>);
</pre>
<p>
4.  Do the same thing in "3.2.3.2. Conversion from floating-point type."
</p>

<p><i>[
Redmond: We prefer explicit conversions for narrowing and implicit for widening.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="614"></a>614. std::string allocator requirements still 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2006-12-05 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
This is based on N2134, where 21.3.1/2 states:
"... The Allocator object used shall be a copy of the Allocator object 
passed to the basic_string object's constructor or, if the constructor does 
not take an Allocator argument, a copy of a default-constructed Allocator 
object."
</p>
<p>
Section 21.3.2/1 lists two constructors:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>basic_string(const basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; str );

basic_string(const basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; str ,
             size_type pos , size_type n = npos,
             const Allocator&amp; a = Allocator());
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
and then says "In the first form, the Allocator value used is copied from 
str.get_allocator().", which isn't an option according to 21.3.1.
</p>
<p><i>[
Batavia:  We need blanket statement to the effect of:
]</i></p>


<ol>
<li>If an allocator is passed in, use it, or,</li>
<li>If a string is passed in, use its allocator.</li>
</ol>
<p><i>[
Review constructors and functions that return a string; make sure we follow these
rules (substr, operator+, etc.).  Howard to supply wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bo adds:  The new container constructor which takes only a <tt>size_type</tt> is not
consistent with 23.2 [container.requirements], p9 which says in part:

</i></p><blockquote><i>
All other constructors for these container types take an
<tt>Allocator&amp;</tt> argument (20.1.2), an allocator whose value type
is the same as the container's value type. A copy of this argument is
used for any memory allocation performed, by these constructors and by
all member functions, during the lifetime of each container object.
</i></blockquote><i>
]</i><p></p>


<p><i>[
post Bellevue: We re-confirm that the issue is real. Pablo will provide wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="615"></a>615. Inconsistencies in Section 21.4</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2006-12-11 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In the current draft N2134, 21.4/1 says
</p>
<p>
"Tables 59,228) 60, 61, 62,and 63 229) 230) describe headers &lt;cctype&gt;, 
&lt;cwctype&gt;, &lt;cstring&gt;, &lt;cwchar&gt;, and &lt;cstdlib&gt; (character conversions), 
respectively."
</p>
<p>
Here footnote 229 applies to table 62, not table 63.
</p>
<p>
Also, footnote 230 lists the new functions in table 63, "atoll, strtoll, 
strtoull, strtof, and strtold added by TR1". However, strtof is not present 
in table 63.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD, editorial.  Send to Pete.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="617"></a>617. std::array is a sequence that doesn't satisfy the sequence requirements?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2006-12-30 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt> header is given under 23.3 [sequences].
23.3.1 [array]/paragraph 3 says:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
"Unless otherwise specified, all array operations are as described in
23.2 [container.requirements]".
</p></blockquote>
<p>
However, array isn't mentioned at all in section 23.2 [container.requirements].
In particular, Table 82 "Sequence requirements" lists several operations (insert, erase, clear) 
that std::array does not have in 23.3.1 [array].
</p>
<p>
Also, Table 83 "Optional sequence operations" lists several operations that 
std::array does have, but array isn't mentioned.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The real issue seems to be different than what is described here.
Non-normative text says that std::array is a sequence container, but
there is disagreement about what that really means. There are two
possible interpretations:
</p>
<ol>
<li>
a sequence container is one that satisfies all sequence container requirements
</li>
<li>
a sequence container is one that satisfies some of the sequence
container requirements. Any operation that the container supports is
specified by one or more sequence container requirements, unless that
operation is specifically singled out and defined alongside the
description of the container itself.
</li>
</ol>
<p>
Move to Tentatively NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-15 Lo�c Joly adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The section 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]/1 states that array is a sequence. 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]/3
introduces table 83, named Sequence container requirements. This seems
to me to be defining the requirements for all sequences. However, array
does not follow all of this requirements (this can be read in the array
specific section, for the standard is currently inconsistent).
</p>

<p>
Proposed resolution 1 (minimal change): 
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
Say that array is a container, that in addition follows only some of the
sequence requirements, as described in the array section:
</p>

<blockquote>
The library provides <del>five</del> <ins>three</ins> basic kinds of sequence containers: <del><tt>array</tt></del>,
<tt>vector</tt>, 
<del><tt>forward_list</tt></del>, <tt>list</tt>, and <tt>deque</tt>. <ins>In addition, <tt>array</tt>
and <tt>forward_list</tt> follows some of the requirements 
of sequences, as described in their respective sections.</ins>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Proposed resolution 2 (most descriptive description, no full wording provided): 
</p>
<blockquote>
Introduce the notion of a Fixed Size Sequence, with it requirement table
that would be a subset of the current Sequence container. array would be
the only Fixed Size Sequence (but dynarray is in the queue for TR2).
Sequence requirements would now be requirements in addition to Fixed
Size Sequence requirements (it is currently in addition to container).
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD Editorial
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This will require a lot of reorganization. Editor doesn't think this is really
an issue, since the description of array can be considered as overriding
what's specified about sequences. Move to NAD.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="626"></a>626. new <i>Remark</i> clauses not documented</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
        <p>

The <i>Remark</i> clauses newly  introduced into the Working Paper 
(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2134.pdf">N2134</a>)
are  not mentioned  in  17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] where  we list  the
meaning  of <i>Effects</i>, <i>Requires</i>,  and other  clauses (with
the exception  of <i>Notes</i> which are documented  as informative in
17.5.1.2 [structure.summary], p2, and which they replace in many cases).

        </p>
        <p>

Propose add a bullet for <i>Remarks</i> along with a brief description.

        </p>
<p><i>[
Batavia:  Alan and Pete to work.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue: Already resolved in current working paper.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="627"></a>627. Low memory and exceptions</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I recognize the need for nothrow guarantees in the exception reporting
mechanism, but I strongly believe that implementors also need an escape hatch
when memory gets really low. (Like, there's not enough heap to construct and
copy exception objects, or not enough stack to process the throw.) I'd like to
think we can put this escape hatch in 18.6.1.1 [new.delete.single],
<tt>operator new</tt>, but I'm not sure how to do it. We need more than a
footnote, but the wording has to be a bit vague. The idea is that if
<tt>new</tt> can't allocate something sufficiently small, it has the right to
<tt>abort</tt>/call <tt>terminate</tt>/call <tt>unexpected</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue: NAD.  1.4p2 specifies a program must behave correctly "within
its resource limits", so no further escape hatch is necessary.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="631"></a>631. conflicting requirements for <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze <b>Opened:</b> 2007-01-31 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The general requirements for <tt><tt>BinaryPredicate</tt></tt> (in 25 [algorithms]/8) contradict the implied specific requirements for
some functions. In particular, it says that:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
[...] if an algorithm takes <tt>BinaryPredicate <i>binary_pred</i></tt>
as its argument and <tt><i>first1</i></tt> and <i>first2</i> as its
iterator arguments, it should work correctly in the construct <tt>if
(binary_pred (*<i>first1</i> , *<i>first2</i> )){...}</tt>.
<tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> always takes the first iterator type as its
first argument, that is, in those cases when <tt>T <i>value</i></tt> is
part of the signature, it should work correctly in the context of <tt>if
(binary_pred (*<i>first1</i> , <i>value</i>)){...}</tt>.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
In the description of <tt>upper_bound</tt> (25.4.3.2 [upper.bound]/2), however, the use is described as
"<tt>!comp(<i>value</i>, <i>e</i>)</tt>", where <tt><i>e</i></tt> is an
element of the sequence (a result of dereferencing
<tt>*<i>first</i></tt>).
</p>

<p>
In the description of <tt>lexicographical_compare</tt>, we have both
"<tt>*<i>first1</i> &lt; *<i>first2</i></tt>" and "<tt>*<i>first2</i>
&lt; *<i>first1</i></tt>" (which presumably implies "<tt>comp(
*<i>first1</i>, *<i>first2</i> )</tt>" and "<tt>comp( *<i>first2</i>,
*<i>first1</i> )</tt>".
</p>

<p>
Logically, the <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> is used as an ordering
relationship, with the semantics of "less than".  Depending on the
function, it may be used to determine equality, or any of the inequality
relationships; doing this requires being able to use it with either
parameter first.  I would thus suggest that the requirement be:
</p>

<p>
Alternatively, one could specify an order for each function. IMHO, this
would be more work for the committee, more work for the implementors,
and of no real advantage for the user: some functions, such as
<tt>lexicographical_compare</tt> or <tt>equal_range</tt>, will still require both
functions, and it seems like a much easier rule to teach that both
functions are always required, rather than to have a complicated list of
when you only need one, and which one.
</p>

<p><i>[
Toronto:  Moved to Open.  ConceptGCC seems to get <tt>lower_bound</tt>
and <tt>upper_bound</tt> to work withoutt these changes.
]</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. The small problem with the "iterator type"
will be fixed. The cited functions (<tt>lower_bound</tt>, <tt>uppwer_bound</tt>,
<tt>equal_range</tt>) don't actually use <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> , and where it is used,
it is consistent with  [algorithm]/8, so the main complaint of the issue
is moot.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-16 Beman clarified wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-01-31: Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. 
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p><i>[
post San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2759.pdf">N2759</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
2010-01-31: The draft standard is well specified as is, and this specification
is desired.  Issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#556">556</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#870">870</a> solve the remaining
unclearness regarding the meaning of BinaryPredicate.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>Change 25 [algorithms] paragraph 8 as indicated:</i></p>

<blockquote>

<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 true. <ins>
<tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> always takes the first iterator <tt>value_type</tt> as
one of its arguments; which argument is unspecified.</ins> <del>In other words,
if</del> <ins> If</ins> an algorithm takes <tt>BinaryPredicate binary_pred</tt>
as its argument and <tt>first1</tt> and <tt>first2</tt> as its iterator
arguments, it should work correctly <ins>both</ins> in the construct <tt>if
(binary_pred(*first1, *first2)){...}</tt> <ins>and <tt>if (binary_pred (*first2,
*first1)){...}</tt></ins>. <del><tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> always takes the first
iterator type as its first argument, that is, in</del> <ins>In</ins> those cases
when <tt>T value</tt> is part of the signature, it should work correctly in the
context of <tt> if (binary_pred(*first1, value)){...}</tt> <ins>and of <tt>if
(binary_pred (value, *first1)){...}</tt></ins>. <del> <tt>binary_pred</tt> shall
not apply any non-constant function through the dereferenced iterators.</del>
<ins>[<i>Note:</i> if the two types are not identical, and neither is
convertable to the other, this may require that the <tt>BinaryPredicate</tt> be
a functional object with two overloaded <tt>operator()()</tt> functions.
� <i>end note</i>]</ins>
</p>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="632"></a>632. Time complexity of size() for std::set</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Lionel B <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-01 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
A recent news group discussion:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
Anyone know if the Standard has anything to say about the time complexity
of size() for std::set?   I need to access a set's size (/not/ to know if it is empty!) heavily
during an algorithm and was thus wondering whether I'd be better off
tracking the size "manually" or whether that'd be pointless.
</p>
<p>
That would be pointless. size() is O(1).
</p>
<p>
Nit: the standard says "should" have constant time. Implementations may take
license to do worse. I know that some do this for <tt>std::list&lt;&gt;</tt> as a part of
some trade-off with other operation.
</p>

<p>
I was aware of that, hence my reluctance to use size() for std::set.
</p>
<p>
However, this reason would not apply to <tt>std::set&lt;&gt;</tt> as far as I can see.
</p>
<p>
Ok, I guess the only option is to try it and see...
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
If I have any recommendation to the C++ Standards Committee it is that
implementations must (not "should"!) document clearly[1], where known, the
time complexity of *all* container access operations.
</p>
<p>
[1] In my case (gcc 4.1.1) I can't swear that the time complexity of size()
for std::set is not documented... but if it is it's certainly well hidden
away.
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): This issue affects all the containers. We'd love to see a
paper dealing with the broad issue. We think that the complexity of the
<tt>size()</tt> member of every container -- except possibly <tt>list</tt> -- should be
O(1). Alan has volunteered to provide wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mandating O(1) size will not fly, too many implementations would be
invalidated. Alan to provide wording that toughens wording, but that
does not absolutely mandate O(1).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We observed that the wording "should" (in note a) has no effect.
Howard prefers that O(1) size be mandated.
It is not clear that this issue can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction,
but Alan will provide wording nonetheless.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Fixed by paper N2923.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="633"></a>633. Return clause mentions undefined "type()"</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-03 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ], p4 says:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
<i>Returns:</i> If <tt>type() == typeid(T)</tt>, a pointer to the stored
function target; otherwise a null pointer.
</p></blockquote>

<ol>
<li>
There exists neither a type, a typedef <tt>type</tt>, nor member
function <tt>type()</tt> in class template function nor in the global or
<tt>std</tt> namespace.
</li>
<li>
Assuming that <tt>type</tt> should have been <tt>target_type()</tt>,
this description would lead to false results, if <tt>T = <i>cv</i>
void</tt> due to returns clause 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ], p1.
</li>
</ol>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ], p4:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<i>Returns:</i> If <tt><del>type()</del> <ins>target_type()</ins> == typeid(T) <ins>&amp;&amp; typeid(T) !=
typeid(void)</ins></tt>, a pointer to the stored function target;
otherwise a null pointer.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Pete: Agreed. It's editorial, so I'll fix it.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="636"></a>636. 26.5.2.3 valarray::operator[]</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-11 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The signature of the const operator[] has been changed to return a const 
reference.
</p>
<p>
The description in paragraph 1 still says that the operator returns by 
value.
</p>
<p><i>[
Pete recommends editorial fix.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="637"></a>637. [c.math]/10 inconsistent return values</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-13 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
26.8 [c.math], paragraph 10 has long lists of added signatures for float and long double 
functions. All the signatures have float/long double return values, which is 
inconsistent with some of the double functions they are supposed to 
overload.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.8 [c.math], paragraph 10,
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>float</del> <ins>int</ins> ilogb(float);
<del>float</del> <ins>long</ins> lrint(float);
<del>float</del> <ins>long</ins> lround(float);
<del>float</del> <ins>long long</ins> llrint(float);
<del>float</del> <ins>long long</ins> llround(float);

<del>long double</del> <ins>int</ins> ilogb(long double);
<del>long double</del> <ins>long</ins> lrint(long double);
<del>long double</del> <ins>long</ins> lround(long double);
<del>long double</del> <ins>long long</ins> llrint(long double);
<del>long double</del> <ins>long long</ins> llround(long double);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="639"></a>639. Still problems with exceptions during streambuf IO</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors], 27.7.2.6.3 [ostream.inserters] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There already exist two active DR's for the wording of 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors]/13
from 14882:2003(E), namely <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#64">64</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#413">413</a>.
</p>

<p>
Even with these proposed corrections, already maintained in N2134,
I have the feeling, that the current wording does still not properly
handle the "exceptional" situation. The combination of para 14
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"[..] Characters are extracted and inserted until
any of the following occurs:
</p>
<p>
[..]
</p>
<p>
- an exception occurs (in which case the exception is caught)."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
and 15
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"If the function inserts no characters, it calls setstate(failbit),
which
may throw ios_base::failure (27.4.4.3). If it inserted no characters
because it caught an exception thrown while extracting characters
from *this and failbit is on in exceptions() (27.4.4.3), then the
caught
exception is rethrown."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
both in N2134 seems to imply that any exception, which occurs
*after* at least one character has been inserted is caught and lost
for
ever. It seems that even if failbit is on in exceptions() rethrow is
not
allowed due to the wording "If it inserted no characters because it
caught an exception thrown while extracting".
</p>

<p>
Is this behaviour by design?
</p>

<p>
I would like to add that its output counterpart in 27.7.2.6.3 [ostream.inserters]/7-9
(also
N2134) does not demonstrate such an exception-loss-behaviour.
On the other side, I wonder concerning several subtle differences
compared to input::
</p>
<p>
1) Paragraph 8 says at its end:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"- an exception occurs while getting a character from sb."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
Note that there is nothing mentioned which would imply that such
an exception will be caught compared to 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors]/14.
</p>

<p>
2) Paragraph 9 says:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"If the function inserts no characters, it calls setstate(failbit)
(which
may throw ios_base::failure (27.4.4.3)). If an exception was thrown
while extracting a character, the function sets failbit in error
state,
and if failbit is on in exceptions() the caught exception is
rethrown."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The sentence starting with "If an exception was thrown" seems to
imply that such an exception *should* be caught before.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
(a) In 27.7.1.2.3 [istream::extractors]/15 (N2134) change the sentence
</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 <del>it inserted no characters because it caught an
exception thrown while extracting characters from <tt>*this</tt></del>
<ins>an exception was thrown while extracting a character from
<tt>*this</tt>, the function sets <tt>failbit</tt> in error state,</ins>
and <tt>failbit</tt> is on in <tt>exceptions()</tt> (27.4.4.3), then the
caught exception is rethrown.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
(b) In 27.7.2.6.3 [ostream.inserters]/8 (N2134) change the sentence:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Gets characters from <tt>sb</tt> and inserts them in <tt>*this</tt>.
Characters are read from <tt>sb</tt> and inserted until any of the
following occurs:
</p>
<ul>
<li>end-of-file occurs on the input sequence;</li>
<li>inserting in the output sequence fails (in which case the character to be inserted is not extracted);</li>
<li>an exception occurs while getting a character from <tt>sb</tt> <ins>(in which
case the exception is caught)</ins>.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
This extractor is described as a formatted input function so the
exception behavior is already specified. There is additional behavior
described in this section that applies to the case in which failbit is
set. This doesn't contradict the usual exception behavior for formatted
input functions because that applies to the case in which badbit is set.





<hr>
<h3><a name="641"></a>641. Editorial fix for 27.6.4 (N2134)</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-18 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The function <tt>f</tt> in para 4 (27.7.4 [ext.manip]) references an unknown <tt>strm</tt>
in the following line:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>mg.get(Iter(str.rdbuf()), Iter(), intl, strm, err, mon);
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 27.7.4 [ext.manip], p4:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>mg.get(Iter(str.rdbuf()), Iter(), intl, str<del>m</del>, err, mon);
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Oxford:  Editorial.
]</i></p>







<hr>
<h3><a name="642"></a>642. Invalidated fstream footnotes in N2134</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-20 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The standard wording of N2134 has extended the 14882:2003(E)
wording for the ifstream/ofstream/fstream open function to fix
a long standing problem, see <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#409">409</a>.
</p>

<p>
Now it's properly written as
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"If that function does not return a null pointer calls clear(),
otherwise
calls setstate(failbit)[..]"
</p></blockquote>

<p>
instead of the previous
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"If that function returns a null pointer, calls setstate(failbit)[..]
</p></blockquote>

<p>
While the old footnotes saying
</p>

<blockquote><p>
"A successful open does not change the error state."
</p></blockquote>

<p>
where correct and important, they are invalid now for ifstream and
ofstream (because clear *does* indeed modify the error state) and
should be removed (Interestingly fstream itself never had these,
although
they where needed for that time).
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 27.9.1.9 [ifstream.members], remove footnote:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<del><sup>334)</sup> A successful open does not change the error state.</del>
</p></blockquote>

<p>
In 27.9.1.13 [ofstream.members], remove footnote:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<del><sup>335)</sup> A successful open does not change the error state.</del>
</p></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="644"></a>644. Possible typos in 'function' description</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-25 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]
</p>
<p>
The note in paragraph 2 refers to 'undefined void operators', while the
section declares a pair of operators returning bool.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post-Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Changed from Pending WP to Open.  This issue was voted to WP at the same time the operators were
changed from private to deleted.  The two issues stepped on each other.  What do we want the return
type of these deleted functions to be?
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-02 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I suggest harmonizing this issue with similar classes. E.g. in
20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak] <tt>bool</tt> return values for
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Y&gt; bool operator&lt;(weak_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp;) const = delete;
template &lt;class Y&gt; bool operator&lt;=(weak_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp;) const = delete;
template &lt;class Y&gt; bool operator&gt;(weak_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp;) const = delete;
template &lt;class Y&gt; bool operator&gt;=(weak_ptr&lt;Y&gt; const&amp;) const = delete;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
are used and basically all <em>newer</em> provided deleted copy assignment operators
of type <tt>X</tt> use the canonical return type <tt>X&amp;</tt> instead of <tt>void</tt>. Since the note
mentioned in the issue description has now already been changed to
</p>
<blockquote>
deleted overloads close possible hole in the type system
</blockquote>
<p>
it seems to be of even lesser need to perform the change. Therefore
I recommend declaring the issue as NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with Daniel's recommendation.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>...
private:
   // 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func], undefined operators:
   template&lt;class Function2&gt; <del>bool</del> <ins>void</ins> operator==(const function&lt;Function2&gt;&amp;);
   template&lt;class Function2&gt; <del>bool</del> <ins>void</ins> operator!=(const function&lt;Function2&gt;&amp;);
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class Function2&gt; <del>bool</del> <ins>void</ins> operator==(const function&lt;Function2&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;class Function2&gt; <del>bool</del> <ins>void</ins> operator!=(const function&lt;Function2&gt;&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="645"></a>645. Missing members in match_results</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28.10 [re.results] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-02-26 <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#re.results">issues</a> in [re.results].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to the description given in 28.10 [re.results]/2 the class template
match_results "shall satisfy the requirements of a Sequence, [..],
except that only operations defined for const-qualified Sequences
are supported".
Comparing the provided operations from 28.10 [re.results]/3 with the
sequence/container tables 80 and 81 one recognizes the following
missing operations:
</p>

<p>
1) The members
</p>

<blockquote><pre>const_iterator rbegin() const;
const_iterator rend() const;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
should exists because 23.1/10 demands these for containers
(all sequences are containers) which support bidirectional
iterators. Aren't these supported by match_result? This is not
explicitely expressed, but it's somewhat implied by two arguments:
</p>
<p>
(a) Several typedefs delegate to
<tt>iterator_traits&lt;BidirectionalIterator&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p>
(b) The existence of <tt>const_reference operator[](size_type n) const</tt>
implies even random-access iteration.
I also suggest, that <tt>match_result</tt> should explicitly mention,
which minimum iterator category is supported and if this does
not include random-access the existence of <tt>operator[]</tt> is
somewhat questionable.
</p>
<p>
2) The new "convenience" members
</p>
<blockquote><pre>const_iterator cbegin() const;
const_iterator cend() const;
const_iterator crbegin() const;
const_iterator crend() const;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
should be added according to tables 80/81.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the following members to the <tt>match_results</tt> synopsis after <tt>end()</tt> in 28.10 [re.results]
para 3:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>const_iterator cbegin() const; 
const_iterator cend() const;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
In section 28.10.4 [re.results.acc] change:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>const_iterator begin() const;
<ins>const_iterator cbegin() const;</ins>
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-7- <i>Returns:</i> A starting iterator that enumerates over all the sub-expressions stored in <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<pre>const_iterator end() const;
<ins>const_iterator cend() const;</ins>
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-8- <i>Returns:</i> A terminating iterator that enumerates over all the sub-expressions stored in <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>



<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Voted to adopt proposed wording in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2409.pdf">N2409</a>
except removing the entry in the table container requirements.  Moved to Review.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:  Proposed wording now in the WP.
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="647"></a>647. Inconsistent regex_search params</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28.11.3 [re.alg.search] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
28.11.3 [re.alg.search]/5 declares
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class iterator, class charT, class traits&gt;
bool regex_search(iterator first, iterator last,
                  const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e,
                  regex_constants::match_flag_type flags =
                      regex_constants::match_default);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
where it's not explained, which iterator category
the parameter iterator belongs to. This is inconsistent
to the preceding declaration in the synopsis section
28.4 [re.syn], which says:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class BidirectionalIterator, class charT, class traits&gt;
bool regex_search(BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last,
                  const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e,
                  regex_constants::match_flag_type flags =
                      regex_constants::match_default);
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 28.11.3 [re.alg.search]/5 replace all three occurences of param "iterator" with
"BidirectionalIterator"
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class <del>iterator</del> <ins>BidirectionalIterator</ins>, class charT, class traits&gt;
  bool regex_search(<del>iterator</del> <ins>BidirectionalIterator</ins> first, <del>iterator</del> <ins>BidirectionalIterator</ins> last, 
                    const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                    regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                      regex_constants::match_default);
</pre>
<p>
-6- <i>Effects:</i> Behaves "as if" by constructing an object what of
type <tt>match_results&lt;<del>iterator</del>
<ins>BidirectionalIterator</ins>&gt;</tt> and then returning the result
of <tt>regex_search(first, last, what, e, flags)</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Applied to working paper while issue was still in New status.





<hr>
<h3><a name="648"></a>648. regex_iterator c'tor needs clarification/editorial fix</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28.12.1.1 [re.regiter.cnstr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-03 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 28.12.1.1 [re.regiter.cnstr]/2 the effects paragraph starts with:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Initializes begin and end to point to the beginning and the
end of the target sequence, sets pregex to &amp;re, sets flags to f,[..]
</p></blockquote>

<p>
There are two issues with this description:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
The meaning of very first part of this quote is unclear, because
there is no target sequence provided, instead there are given two
parameters a and b, both of type BidirectionalIterator. The mentioned
part does not explain what a and b represent.
</li>
<li>
There does not exist any parameter f, but instead a parameter
m in the constructor declaration, so this is actually an editorial
fix.
</li>
</ol>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 28.12.1.1 [re.regiter.cnstr]/2 change the above quoted part by
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<i>Effects:</i> Initializes <tt>begin</tt> and <tt>end</tt> to point to
the beginning and the end of the target sequence <ins>designated by the
iterator range <tt>[a, b)</tt></ins>, sets <tt>pregex</tt> to
<tt>&amp;re</tt>, sets <tt>flags</tt> to <tt><del>f</del>
<ins>m</ins></tt>, then calls <tt>regex_search(begin, end, match,
*pregex, flags)</tt>. If this call returns <tt>false</tt> the
constructor sets <tt>*this</tt> to the end-of-sequence iterator.
</p></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="649"></a>649. Several typos in regex_token_iterator constructors</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-03 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/1+2 both the constructor declaration
and the following text shows some obvious typos:
</p>
<p>
1) The third constructor form is written as
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;std::size_t N&gt;
  regex_token_iterator(BidirectionalIterator a, BidirectionalIterator b, 
                       const regex_type&amp; re, 
                       const int (&amp;submatches)[R], 
                       regex_constants::match_flag_type m = 
                         regex_constants::match_default);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
where the dimensions of submatches are specified by an
unknown value R, which should be N.
</p>
<p>
2) Paragraph 2 of the same section says in its last sentence:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
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>[&amp;submatches, &amp;submatches + R)</tt>.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
where again R must be replaced by N.
</p>

<p>
3) Paragraph 3 of the same section says in its first sentence:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Each constructor then sets <tt>N</tt> to <tt>0</tt>, and
<tt>position</tt> to <tt>position_iterator(a, b, re, f)</tt>.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
where a non-existing parameter "f" is mentioned, which must be
replaced
by the parameter "m".
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/1:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;std::size_t N&gt;
  regex_token_iterator(BidirectionalIterator a, BidirectionalIterator b, 
                       const regex_type&amp; re, 
                       const int (&amp;submatches)[<del>R</del> <ins>N</ins>], 
                       regex_constants::match_flag_type m = 
                         regex_constants::match_default);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/2:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
<i>Effects:</i> The first constructor initializes the member
<tt>subs</tt> to hold the single value <tt>submatch</tt>. The second
constructor initializes the member <tt>subs</tt> to hold a copy of the
argument <tt>submatches</tt>. 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>[&amp;submatches, &amp;submatches +
<del>R</del> <ins>N</ins>)</tt>.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
Change 28.12.2.1 [re.tokiter.cnstr]/3:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Each constructor then sets <tt>N</tt> to <tt>0</tt>, and
<tt>position</tt> to <tt>position_iterator(a, b, re, <del>f</del>
<ins>m</ins>)</tt>. If <tt>position</tt> is not an end-of-sequence
iterator the constructor sets <tt>result</tt> to the address of the
current match. Otherwise if any of the values stored in <tt>subs</tt> is
equal to <tt>-1</tt> the constructor sets <tt>*this</tt> to a suffix
iterator that points to the range <tt>[a, b)</tt>, otherwise the
constructor sets <tt>*this</tt> to an end-of-sequence iterator.
</p></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="653"></a>653. Library reserved names</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 1.2 [intro.refs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <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#intro.refs">issues</a> in [intro.refs].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
1.2 [intro.refs] Normative references
</p>

<p>
The following standards contain provisions which, through reference in
this text, constitute provisions of this Interna- tional Standard. At
the time of publication, the editions indicated were valid. All
standards are subject to revision, and parties to agreements based on
this International Standard are encouraged to investigate the
possibility of applying the most recent editions of the standards
indicated below. Members of IEC and ISO maintain registers of currently
valid International Standards.
</p>

<ul>
<li>Ecma International, ECMAScript Language Specification, Standard
Ecma-262, third edition, 1999.</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 2382 (all parts), Information technology - Vocabulary</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 9899:1990, Programming languages - C</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 9899/Amd.1:1995, Programming languages - C, AMENDMENT 1: C
Integrity</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 9899:1999, Programming languages - C</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 9899:1999/Cor.1:2001 Programming languages - C</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 9899:1999/Cor.2:2004 Programming languages - C</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 9945:2003, Information Technology-Portable Operating System
Interface (POSIX)</li>
<li>ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993 Information technology - Universal Multiple-Octet
Coded Character Set (UCS) - Part 1: Architecture and Basic Multilingual
Plane</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>

<p>
I'm not sure how many of those reserve naming patterns that might affect
us, but I am equally sure I don't own a copy of any of these to check!
</p>
<p>
The point is to list the reserved naming patterns, rather than the
individual names themselves - although we may want to list C keywords
that are valid identifiers in C++ but likely to cause trouble in shared
headers (e.g. restrict)
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Recommend NAD.  No one has identified a specific defect, just the possibility of one.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Post-Kona: Alisdair request Open. A good example of the problem was a
discussion of the system error proposal, where it was pointed out an all-caps
identifier starting with a capital E conflicted with reserved macro names for
both Posix and C.  I had absolutely no idea of this rule, and suspect I was
not the only one in the room.<br>
<br>
Resolution will require someone with access to all the listed documents to
research their respective name reservation rules, or people with access to
specific documents add their rules to this issue until the list is complete.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue: Wording is aleady present in various standards, and no-one has come forward with wording.
Suggest a formal paper rather than a defect report is the correct way to proceed.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="656"></a>656. Typo in subtract_with_carry_engine declaration</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.2 [rand.synopsis] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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.synopsis">issues</a> in [rand.synopsis].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
26.5.2 [rand.synopsis] the header <tt>&lt;random&gt;</tt> synopsis
contains an unreasonable closing curly brace inside the
<tt>subtract_with_carry_engine</tt> declaration.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the current declaration in 26.5.2 [rand.synopsis]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class UIntType, size_t w<del>}</del>, size_t s, size_t r&gt;
class subtract_with_carry_engine;
</pre></blockquote>


<p><i>[
Pete: Recommends editorial.
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="657"></a>657. unclear requirement about header inclusion</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.2.2 [using.headers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Gennaro Prota <b>Opened:</b> 2007-03-14 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
17.6.2.2 [using.headers] states:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
A translation unit shall include a header only outside of any
external declaration or definition, [...]
</p></blockquote>

<p>
I see three problems with this requirement:
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li><p>The C++ standard doesn't define what an "external declaration" or
an "external definition" are (incidentally the C99 standard does, and
has a sentence very similar to the above regarding header inclusion).
</p><p>
I think the intent is that the #include directive shall lexically
appear outside *any* declaration; instead, when the issue was pointed
out on comp.std.c++ at least one poster interpreted "external
declaration" as "declaration of an identifier with external linkage".
If this were the correct interpretation, then the two inclusions below
would be legal:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>  // at global scope
  static void f()
  {
# include &lt;cstddef&gt;
  }

  static void g()
  {
# include &lt;stddef.h&gt;
  }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
(note that while the first example is unlikely to compile correctly,
the second one may well do)
</p></li>

<li><p>as the sentence stands, violations will require a diagnostic; is
this the intent? It was pointed out on comp.std.c++ (by several
posters) that at least one way to ensure a diagnostic exists:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
   [If there is an actual file for each header,] one simple way
   to implement this would be to insert a reserved identifier
   such as __begin_header  at the start of each standard header.
   This reserved identifier would be ignored for all other
   purposes, except that, at the appropriate point in phase 7, if
   it is found inside an external definition, a diagnostic is
   generated. There's many other similar ways to achieve the same
   effect.
   </p>
<p>                                 --James Kuyper, on comp.std.c++
</p></blockquote></li>

<li><p>is the term "header" meant to be limited to standard headers?
Clause 17 is all about the library, but still the general question is
interesting and affects one of the points in the explicit namespaces
proposal (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1691.html">n1691</a>):
</p>
<blockquote><p>
    Those seeking to conveniently enable argument-dependent
    lookups for all operators within an explicit namespace
    could easily create a header file that does so:
</p><pre>    namespace mymath::
    {
        #include "using_ops.hpp"
    }
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
We believe that the existing language does not cause any real confusion
and any new formulation of the rules that we could come up with are
unlikely to be better than what's already in the standard.





<hr>
<h3><a name="662"></a>662. Inconsistent handling of incorrectly-placed thousands separators</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Cosmin Truta <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-05 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
From Section 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals], paragraphs 11 and 12, it is implied
that the value read from a stream must be stored
even if the placement of thousands separators does not conform to the
<code>grouping()</code> specification from the <code>numpunct</code> facet.
Since incorrectly-placed thousands separators are flagged as an extraction
failure (by the means of <code>failbit</code>), we believe it is better not
to store the value. A consistent strategy, in which any kind of extraction
failure leaves the input item intact, is conceptually cleaner, is able to avoid
corner-case traps, and is also more understandable from the programmer's point
of view.
</p>
<p>
Here is a quote from <i>"The C++ Programming Language (Special Edition)"</i>
by B.&nbsp;Stroustrup (Section&nbsp;D.4.2.3, pg.&nbsp;897):
</p>
<blockquote><p>
<i>"If a value of the desired type could not be read, failbit is set in r.
[...] An input operator will use r to determine how to set the state of its
stream. If no error was encountered, the value read is assigned through v;
otherwise, v is left unchanged."</i>
</p></blockquote>
<p>
This statement implies that <code>rdstate()</code> alone is sufficient to
determine whether an extracted value is to be assigned to the input item
<i>val</i> passed to <code>do_get</code>. However, this is in disagreement
with the current C++ Standard. The above-mentioned assumption is true in all
cases, except when there are mismatches in digit grouping. In the latter case,
the parsed value is assigned to <i>val</i>, and, at the same time, <i>err</i>
is assigned to <code>ios_base::failbit</code> (essentially "lying" about the
success of the operation). Is this intentional? The current behavior raises
both consistency and usability concerns.
</p>
<p>
Although digit grouping is outside the scope of <code>scanf</code> (on which
the virtual methods of <code>num_get</code> are based), handling of grouping
should be consistent with the overall behavior of scanf. The specification of
<code>scanf</code> makes a distinction between input failures and matching
failures, and yet both kinds of failures have no effect on the input items
passed to <code>scanf</code>. A mismatch in digit grouping logically falls in
the category of matching failures, and it would be more consistent, and less
surprising to the user, to leave the input item intact whenever a failure is
being signaled.
</p>
<p>
The extraction of <code>bool</code> is another example outside the scope of
<code>scanf</code>, and yet consistent, even in the event of a successful
extraction of a <code>long</code> but a failed conversion from
<code>long</code> to <code>bool</code>.
</p>
<p>
Inconsistency is further aggravated by the fact that, when failbit is set,
subsequent extraction operations are no-ops until <code>failbit</code> is
explicitly cleared. Assuming that there is no explicit handling of
<code>rdstate()</code> (as in <code>cin&gt;&gt;i&gt;&gt;j</code>) it is
counter-intuitive to be able to extract an integer with mismatched digit
grouping, but to be unable to extract another, properly-formatted integer
that immediately follows.
</p>
<p>
Moreover, setting <code>failbit</code>, and selectively assigning a value to
the input item, raises usability problems. Either the strategy of
<code>scanf</code> (when there is no extracted value in case of failure), or
the strategy of the <code>strtol</code> family (when there is always an
extracted value, and there are well-defined defaults in case of a failure) are
easy to understand and easy to use. On the other hand, if <code>failbit</code>
alone cannot consistently make a difference between a failed extraction, and a
successful but not-quite-correct extraction whose output happens to be the same
as the previous value, the programmer must resort to implementation tricks.
Consider the following example:
</p>
<pre>    int i = old_i;
    cin &gt;&gt; i;
    if (cin.fail())
        // can the value of i be trusted?
        // what does it mean if i == old_i?
        // ...
</pre>
<p>
Last but not least, the current behvaior is not only confusing to the casual
reader, but it has also been confusing to some book authors. Besides
Stroustrup's book, other books (e.g. "Standard C++ IOStreams and Locales" by
Langer and Kreft) are describing the same mistaken assumption. Although books
are not to be used instead of the standard reference, the readers of these
books, as well as the people who are generally familiar to <code>scanf</code>,
are even more likely to misinterpret the standard, and expect the input items
to remain intact when a failure occurs.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Change 22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<b>Stage 3:</b> The result of stage 2 processing can be one of
</p>
<ul>
<li>A sequence of <code>chars</code> has been accumulated in stage 2 that is converted (according to the rules of <code>scanf</code>) to a value of the type of <code><i>val</i></code>.  <del>This value is stored in <code><i>val</i></code> and <code>ios_base::goodbit</code> is stored in <code><i>err</i></code>.</del></li>

<li>The sequence of <code>chars</code> accumulated in stage 2 would have caused <code>scanf</code> to report an input failure. <code>ios_base::failbit</code> is assigned to <code><i>err</i></code>.</li>
</ul>
<p>
<ins>In the first case,</ins> <del>D</del><ins>d</ins>igit grouping is checked.  That is, the positions of discarded separators is examined for consistency with <code>use_facet&lt;numpunct&lt;charT&gt; &gt;(<i>loc</i>).grouping()</code>.  If they are not consistent then <code>ios_base::failbit</code> is assigned to <code><i>err</i></code>.  <ins>Otherwise, the value that was converted in stage 2 is stored in <code><i>val</i></code> and <code>ios_base::goodbit</code> is stored in <code><i>err</i></code>.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
post-Toronto: Changed from New to NAD at the request of the author.  The preferred solution of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2327.pdf">N2327</a>
makes this resolution obsolete.





<hr>
<h3><a name="663"></a>663. Complexity Requirements</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications] para 5 says
</p>

<blockquote><p>
-5- Complexity requirements specified in the library
clauses are upper bounds, and implementations that provide better
complexity guarantees satisfy the requirements.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The following
objection has been raised:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
The library clauses suggest general
guidelines regarding complexity, but we have been unable to discover
any absolute hard-and-fast formulae for these requirements. Unless
or until the Library group standardizes specific hard-and-fast
formulae, we regard all the complexity requirements as subject to a
"fudge factor" without any intrinsic upper bound.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
[Plum ref
_23213Y31 etc]
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Kona (2007): No specific instances of underspecification have been
identified, and big-O notation always involves constant factors.





<hr>
<h3><a name="667"></a>667. <tt>money_get</tt>'s widened minus sign</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals], para 1 says:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
The result is returned as an integral value
stored in <tt>units</tt> or as a sequence of digits possibly preceded by a
minus sign (as produced by <tt>ct.widen(c)</tt> where <tt>c</tt> is '-' or in the range
from '0' through '9', inclusive) stored in <tt>digits</tt>.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The following
objection has been raised:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Some implementations interpret this to mean that a facet derived from
<tt>ctype&lt;wchar_t&gt;</tt> can provide its own member <tt>do_widen(char)</tt>
which produces e.g. <tt>L'@'</tt> for the "widened" minus sign, and that the
<tt>'@'</tt> symbol will appear in the resulting sequence of digits.  Other
implementations have assumed that one or more places in the standard permit the
implementation to "hard-wire" <tt>L'-'</tt> as the "widened" minus sign.  Are
both interpretations permissible, or only  one?
</p></blockquote>

<p>
[Plum ref _222612Y14]
</p>

<p>
Furthermore: if <tt>ct.widen('9')</tt> produces <tt>L'X'</tt> (a non-digit), does a
parse fail if a <tt>'9'</tt> appears in the subject string? [Plum ref _22263Y33]
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Bill and Dietmar to provide proposed wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
post Bellevue: Bill adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The Standard is clear that the minus sign stored in <tt>digits</tt> is <tt>ct.widen('-')</tt>.
The subject string must contain characters <tt>c</tt> in the set <tt>[-0123456789]</tt>
which are translated by <tt>ct.widen(c)</tt> calls before being stored in <tt>digits</tt>;
the widened characters are not relevant to the parsing of the subject string.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with Bill's comment above,
in line with the first of the interpretations offered in the issue.
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="668"></a>668. <tt>money_get</tt>'s empty minus sign</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals], para 3 says:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
If <tt>pos</tt> or <tt>neg</tt> is empty, the sign component is
optional, and if no sign is detected, the result is given the sign
that corresponds to the source of the empty string.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The following objection has been raised:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
A <tt>negative_sign</tt> of "" means "there is no
way to write a negative sign" not "any null sequence is a negative
sign, so it's always there when you look for it".
</p></blockquote>

<p>
[Plum ref _222612Y32]
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Bill to provide proposed wording and interpretation of existing wording.
]</i></p>


<p>
Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-17 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I disagree that a <tt>negative_sign</tt> of "" means "there is no way to
write a negative sign".  The meaning requires the sentences of 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals] p3 following that quoted above to be
taken into account:
</p>

<blockquote>
-3- ... If <tt>pos</tt> or <tt>neg</tt> is empty, the sign component is
optional, and if no sign is detected, the result is given the sign that
corresponds to the source of the empty string. Otherwise, the character
in the indicated position must match the first character of <tt>pos</tt>
or <tt>neg</tt>, and the result is given the corresponding sign. If the
first character of <tt>pos</tt> is equal to the first character of
<tt>neg</tt>, or if both strings are empty, the result is given a
positive sign.
</blockquote>

<p>
So a <tt>negative_sign</tt> of "" means "there is no way to write a
negative sign" only when <tt>positive_sign</tt> is also "".  However
when <tt>negative_sign</tt> is "" and <tt>postive_sign.size() &gt;
0</tt>, then one writes a negative value by not writing the
<tt>postive_sign</tt> in the position indicated by
<tt>money_base::sign</tt>.
For example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>pattern = {symbol, sign, value, none}
positive_sign = "+"
negative_sign = ""
$123   // a negative value, using optional sign
$+123  // a positive value
$-123  // a parse error
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
And:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>pattern = {symbol, sign, value, none}
positive_sign = ""
negative_sign = ""
$123   // a positive value, no sign possible
$+123  // a parse error
$-123  // a parse error
</pre></blockquote>


<p>
And (regarding <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>):
</p>

<blockquote><pre>pattern = {symbol, sign, value, none}
positive_sign = "-"
negative_sign = "-"
$123   // a parse error, sign is mandatory
$+123  // a parse error
$-123  // a positive value
</pre></blockquote>


<p>
The text seems both unambiguous and clear to me.  I recommend NAD for
both this issue and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a>.  However I would have no
objection to adding examples such as those above.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
This discussion applies equally to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a> (q.v.).
Howard has added examples above,
and recommends either NAD or a resolution that adds his (or similar) examples
to the Working Paper.
</p>
<p>
Alan would like to rewrite paragraph 3.
</p>
<p>
We recommend moving to NAD.
Anyone who feels strongly about adding the examples
is invited to submit corresponding wording.
We further recommend issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#669">669</a> be handled identically.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-14 Alan reopens with improved wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
No consensus for closing as NAD.  Leave in Review.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD.  Agreed that the original assessment as NAD was correct.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals] p3:
</p>

<blockquote>
-3- <del>If the first character (if any) in the string pos returned by
<tt>mp.positive_sign()</tt> or the string <tt>neg</tt> returned by
<tt>mp.negative_sign()</tt> is recognized in the position indicated by
sign in the format pattern, it is consumed and any remaining characters
in the string are required after all the other format components.
[<i>Example:</i> If <tt>showbase</tt> is off, then for a <tt>neg</tt>
value of "()" and a currency symbol of "L", in "(100 L)" the "L" is
consumed; but if <tt>neg</tt> is "-", the "L" in "-100 L" is not
consumed. -- <i>end example</i>] If <tt>pos</tt> or <tt>neg</tt> is
empty, the sign component is optional, and if no sign is detected, the
result is given the sign that corresponds to the source of the empty
string. Otherwise, the character in the indicated position must match
the first character of <tt>pos</tt> or <tt>neg</tt>, and the result is
given the corresponding sign. If the first character of <tt>pos</tt> is
equal to the first character of <tt>neg</tt>, or if both strings are
empty, the result is given a positive sign.</del>

<ins>The sign pattern strings <tt>pos</tt> and <tt>neg</tt> are returned by
<tt>mp.positive_sign()</tt> and <tt>mp.negative_sign()</tt> respectively. A sign pattern
is matched if its first character is recognized in <tt>s</tt> in the position
indicated by <tt>sign</tt> in the format pattern, or if the pattern is empty and
there is no sign recognized in <tt>s</tt>. A match is required to occur. If both
patterns are matched, the result is given a positive sign, otherwise the
result is given the sign corresponding to the matched pattern. 
If the pattern contains more than one character, the characters after the first 
must be matched in <tt>s</tt> after all other format components. 
If any sign
characters are matched, <tt>s</tt> is consumed up to and including those characters.
[<i>Example:</i> If <tt>showbase</tt> is off, then for a <tt>neg</tt>
value of "<tt>()</tt>" and a currency symbol of "<tt>L</tt>", in
"<tt>(100 L)</tt>" the entire string is consumed; but for a <tt>neg</tt>
value of "<tt>-</tt>", in "<tt>-100 L</tt>", the string is consumed
through the second "<tt>0</tt>" (the space and "<tt>L</tt>" are not consumed). � <i>end
example</i>] </ins>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="669"></a>669. Equivalent postive and negative signs in <tt>money_get</tt></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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals], para 3 sentence 4 says:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
If the first character of <tt>pos</tt> is equal to the first character of <tt>neg</tt>, 
or if both strings are empty, the result is given a positive sign.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
One interpretation is that an input sequence must match either the
positive pattern or the negative pattern, and then in either event it
is interpreted as positive.  The following objections has been raised:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
The input can successfully match only a positive sign, so the negative
pattern is an unsuccessful match.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
[Plum ref _222612Y34, 222612Y51b]
</p>

<p><i>[
Bill to provide proposed wording and interpretation of existing wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-05-17 See Howard's comments in related issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
This discussion applies equally to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a> (q.v.).
Howard has added examples there,
and recommends either NAD or a resolution that adds his (or similar) examples
to the Working Paper.
</p>
<p>
We recommend moving to NAD.
Anyone who feels strongly about adding the examples
is invited to submit corresponding wording.
We further recommend issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#668">668</a> be handled identically.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="670"></a>670. <tt>money_base::pattern</tt> and <tt>space</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.6.3 [locale.moneypunct] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas Plum <b>Opened:</b> 2007-04-16 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#836">836</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
22.4.6.3 [locale.moneypunct], para 2 says:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
The value <tt>space</tt> indicates that at least one space is required at 
that position.
</p></blockquote>

<p>
The following objection has been raised:
</p>

<blockquote><p>
Whitespace is optional when matching space. (See 22.4.6.1.2 [locale.money.get.virtuals], para 2.)
</p></blockquote>

<p>
[Plum ref _22263Y22]
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Bill to provide proposed wording. We agree that C++03 is
ambiguous, and that we want C++0X to say "space" means 0 or more
whitespace characters on input.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="683"></a>683. regex_token_iterator summary error</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Eric Niebler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-02 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
28.12.2 [re.tokiter], p3 says:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
After it is constructed, the iterator finds and stores a value
<tt>match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator&gt;</tt> position and sets the
internal count <tt>N</tt> to zero.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Should read:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
After it is constructed, the iterator finds and stores a value
<tt><del>match_results</del><ins>regex_iterator</ins>&lt;BidirectionalIterator<ins>, charT, traits</ins>&gt;</tt>
position and sets the internal count <tt>N</tt> to zero.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
John adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote><p>
Yep, looks like a typo/administrative fix to me.
</p></blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="684"></a>684. Unclear which members of match_results should be used in comparison</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28.10 [re.results] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.results">issues</a> in [re.results].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 28.4 [re.syn] of N2284, two template functions 
are declared here: 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>// 28.10, class template match_results: 
  &lt;<i>snip</i>&gt;
// match_results comparisons 
  template &lt;class BidirectionalIterator, class Allocator&gt; 
    bool operator== (const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m1, 
                     const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m2); 
  template &lt;class BidirectionalIterator, class Allocator&gt; 
    bool operator!= (const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m1, 
                     const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m2); 

// 28.10.6, match_results swap:
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
But the details of these two bool operator functions (i.e., which members of
<tt>match_results</tt> should be used in comparison) are not described in any
following sections.
</p>

<p><i>[
John adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote><p>
That looks like a bug: <tt>operator==</tt> should return <tt>true</tt> only if
the two objects refer to the same match - ie if one object was constructed as a
copy of the other.
</p></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Bill and Pete to add minor wording to that proposed in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2409.pdf">N2409</a>.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a new section after 28.10.7 [re.results.swap], which reads:
</p>
<p>
28.10.7 match_results non-member functions.
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class BidirectionalIterator, class Allocator&gt; 
  bool operator==(const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m1, 
                  const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m2);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> only if the two objects refer to the same match.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class BidirectionalIterator, class Allocator&gt; 
  bool operator!=(const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m1, 
                  const match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m2);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>!(m1 == m2)</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class BidirectionalIterator, class Allocator&gt; 
  void swap(match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m1, 
            match_results&lt;BidirectionalIterator, Allocator&gt;&amp; m2);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>m1.swap(m2)</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:  Proposed wording now in WP.
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="686"></a>686. Unique_ptr and shared_ptr fail to specify non-convertibility to int for unspecified-bool-type</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.9.2.4 [unique.ptr.single.observers], 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-14 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The standard library uses the <tt>operator <i>unspecified-bool-type</i>() const</tt> idiom in
five places. In three of those places (20.8.14.2.3 [func.wrap.func.cap], function capacity 
for example) the returned value is constrained to disallow
unintended conversions to int. The standardese is
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The return type shall not be convertible to <tt>int</tt>.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
This constraint is omitted for <tt>unique_ptr</tt> and <tt>shared_ptr</tt>. It should be added for those.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Close as NAD. Accepting paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2435.htm">N2435</a>
makes it irrelevant.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
To the <i>Returns</i> paragraph for <tt>operator <i>unspecified-bool-type</i>()
const</tt> of 20.9.9.2.4 [unique.ptr.single.observers] paragraph 11 and 20.9.10.2.5 [util.smartptr.shared.obs] paragraph 16, add the sentence:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
The return type shall not be convertible to <tt>int</tt>.
</p></blockquote>


<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Uncertain if <tt>nullptr</tt> will address this issue.
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="690"></a>690. abs(long long) should return long long</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-10 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Quoting the latest draft (n2135), 26.8 [c.math]: 
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The added signatures are:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>long abs(long); // labs()
long abs(long long); // llabs()
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>
Shouldn't <tt>abs(long long)</tt> have <tt>long long</tt> as return type?
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.8 [c.math]: 
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>long </ins>long abs(long long); // llabs()
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Had already been fixed in the WP by the time the LWG reviewed this.





<hr>
<h3><a name="701"></a>701. assoc laguerre poly's</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> TR1 5.2.1.1 [tr.num.sf.Lnm] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Crawford <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-30 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I see that the definition the associated Laguerre
polynomials TR1 5.2.1.1 [tr.num.sf.Lnm] has been corrected since
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1687.pdf">N1687</a>.
However, the draft standard only specifies ranks of integer value <tt>m</tt>,
while the associated Laguerre polynomials are actually valid for real
values of <tt>m &gt; -1</tt>.  In the case of non-integer values of <tt>m</tt>, the
definition  <tt><i>L</i><sub>n</sub><sup>(m)</sup> = (1/n!)e<sup>x</sup>x<sup>-m</sup> (d/dx)<sup>n</sup> (e<sup>-x</sup>x<sup>m+n</sup>)</tt>
must be used, which also holds for integer values of <tt>m</tt>.  See
Abramowitz &amp; Stegun, 22.11.6 for the general case, and 22.5.16-17 for
the integer case.  In fact fractional values are most commonly used in
physics, for example to <tt>m = +/- 1/2</tt> to describe the harmonic
oscillator in 1 dimension, and <tt>1/2, 3/2, 5/2, ...</tt> in 3
dimensions.
</p>
<p>
If I am correct, the calculation of the more general case is no
more difficult, and is in fact the function implemented in the GNU
Scientific Library.  I would urge you to consider upgrading the 
standard, either adding extra functions for real <tt>m</tt> or switching the
current ones to <tt>double</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We understand the issue, and have opted not to extend as recommended.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="702"></a>702. Restriction in associated Legendre functions</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> TR1 5.2.1.2 [tr.num.sf.Plm] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Christopher Crawford <b>Opened:</b> 2007-06-30 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
One other small thing, in TR1 5.2.1.2 [tr.num.sf.Plm], the restriction should  be
<tt>|x| &lt;= 1</tt>, not <tt>x &gt;= 0</tt>.</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The error has been corrected in the pending IS.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="707"></a>707. null pointer constant for <tt>exception_ptr</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jens Maurer <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-20 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
From the Toronto Core wiki:
</p>

<p>
What do you mean by "null pointer constant"? How do you guarantee that
<tt>exception_ptr() == 1</tt> doesn't work?  Do you even want to prevent that?
What's the semantics?  What about <tt>void *p = 0; exception_ptr() == p</tt>?
Maybe disallow those in the interface, but how do you do that with
portable C++? Could specify just "make it work".
</p>

<p>
Peter's response:
</p>

<p>
null pointer constant as defined in 4.10 [conv.ptr]. Intent is "just make it
work", can be implemented as assignment operator taking a unique pointer
to member, as in the unspecified bool type idiom.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Original implementation was possible using the "unspecified-null-pointer" idiom, similar to unspecified-bool.
</p>
<p>
Even simpler now with nullptr_t.
</p>
<p>
NAD Rationale : null pointer constant is a perfectly defined term, and
while API is clearly implementable there is no need to spell out
implementation details.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="708"></a>708. Locales need to be per thread and updated for POSIX changes</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22 [localization] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2007-07-28 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The POSIX "Extended API Set Part 4,"
</p>
<blockquote><p>
<a href="http://www.opengroup.org/sib/details.tpl?id=C065">http://www.opengroup.org/sib/details.tpl?id=C065</a>
</p></blockquote>
<p>
introduces extensions to the C locale mechanism that
allow multiple concurrent locales to be used in the same application
by introducing a type <tt>locale_t</tt> that is very similar to
<tt>std::locale</tt>, and a number of <tt>_l</tt> functions that make use of it.
</p>
<p>
The global locale (set by setlocale) is now specified to be per-
process. If a thread does not call <tt>uselocale</tt>, the global locale is
in effect for that thread. It can install a per-thread locale by
using <tt>uselocale</tt>.
</p>
<p>
There is also a nice <tt>querylocale</tt> mechanism by which one can obtain
the name (such as "de_DE") for a specific <tt>facet</tt>, even for combined
locales, with no <tt>std::locale</tt> equivalent.
</p>
<p>
<tt>std::locale</tt> should be harmonized with the new POSIX <tt>locale_t</tt>
mechanism and provide equivalents for <tt>uselocale</tt> and <tt>querylocale</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Kona (2007): Bill and Nick to provide wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
San Francisco: Bill and Nick still intend to provide wording, but this
is a part of the task to be addressed by the group that will look into
issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#860">860</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
It's our intention to stay in sync with WG14. If WG14 makes a decision
that requires a change in WG21 the issue will be reopened.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="717"></a>717. Incomplete <tt>valarray::operator[]</tt> specification in [valarray.access]</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Since the return type of <tt>valarray</tt>'s <tt>operator[] const</tt> overload has been
changed to <tt>const T&amp;</tt> as described in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#389">389</a> several paragraphs of
the section 26.6.2.3 [valarray.access] are now
incompletely
specified, because many requirements and guarantees should now also
apply to the const overload. Most notably, the address and reference
guarantees should be extended to the const overload case.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.6.2.3 [valarray.access]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1- <del>When applied to a constant array, the subscript operator returns a
reference to the corresponding element of the array. When applied to a
non-constant array, t</del><ins>T</ins>he subscript operator returns a
reference to the corresponding element of the array.
</p>

<p>
-3- The expression <tt>&amp;a[i+j] == &amp;a[i] + j</tt> evaluates as <tt>true</tt> for all <tt>size_t i</tt>
and <tt>size_t j</tt> such that <tt>i+j</tt> is less 
than the length of the <del>non-constant</del> array <tt>a</tt>.
</p>

<p>
-4- Likewise, the expression <tt>&amp;a[i] != &amp;b[j]</tt> evaluates
as <tt>true</tt> for any two <del>non-constant</del> arrays <tt>a</tt> and
<tt>b</tt> and for any <tt>size_t i</tt> and <tt>size_t j</tt> such that
<tt>i</tt> is less than the length of <tt>a</tt> and <tt>j</tt> is less
than the length of <tt>b</tt>. This property indicates an absence of
aliasing and may be used to advantage by optimizing
compilers.<sup>281)</sup>
</p>

<p>
-5- The reference returned by the subscript operator for a<ins>n</ins> <del>non-constant</del> array is guaranteed to be valid until
the member function <tt>resize(size_t, T)</tt> (26.5.2.7) is called for that array or until the lifetime 
of that array ends, whichever happens first.
</p>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="718"></a>718. <tt>basic_string</tt> is not a sequence</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <b>Opened:</b> 2007-08-18 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 21.4 [basic.string]/3 states:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The class template <tt>basic_string</tt> conforms to the requirements for a 
Sequence (23.1.1) and for a Reversible Container (23.1).
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
First of all, 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts] is no longer "Sequence" but "Sequence container". 
Secondly, after the resent changes to containers (<tt>emplace</tt>, <tt>push_back</tt>, 
<tt>const_iterator</tt> parameters to <tt>insert</tt> and <tt>erase</tt>), <tt>basic_string</tt> is not 
even close to conform to the current requirements.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>emplace, for example, may not make sense for strings. Is also likely suboptimal</li>
<li>with concepts do we need to maintain string as sequence container?</li>
<li>One approach might be to say something like: string is a sequence except it doesn't have these functions</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>basic_string already has push_back</li>
<li>const_iterator parameters to insert and erase should be added to basic_string</li>
<li>this leaves emplace to handle -- we have the following options:
<ul>
<li>option 1: add it to string even though it's optional</li>
<li>option 2: make emplace optional to sequences (move from table 89 to 90)</li>
<li>option 3: say string not sequence (the proposal),</li>
<li>option 4: add an exception to basic string wording.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
General consensus is to suggest option 2.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD Editorial
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Remove this sentence, in recognition of the fact that <tt>basic_string</tt> is 
not just a <tt>vector</tt>-light for literal types, but something quite 
different, a string abstraction in its own right.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="721"></a>721. <tt>wstring_convert</tt> inconsistensies</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Bo Persson <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Paragraph 3 says that the <tt>Codecvt</tt> template parameter shall meet the 
requirements of <tt>std::codecvt</tt>, even though <tt>std::codecvt</tt> itself cannot 
be used (because of a protected destructor).
</p>

<p>
How are we going to explain this code to beginning programmers?
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class I, class E, class S&gt;
struct codecvt : std::codecvt&lt;I, E, S&gt;
{
    ~codecvt()
    { }
};

void main()
{
    std::wstring_convert&lt;codecvt&lt;wchar_t, char, std::mbstate_t&gt; &gt; compiles_ok;
    
    std::wstring_convert&lt;std::codecvt&lt;wchar_t, char, std::mbstate_t&gt; &gt;   not_ok;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Bill will propose a resolution.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
codecvt isn't intended for beginning programmers. This is a regrettable
consequence of the original design of the facet.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="725"></a>725. Optional sequence container requirements column label</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-16 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Table 90: (Optional sequence container operations) states the
"assertion note pre/post-condition" of <tt>operator[]</tt> to be
</p>

<blockquote><pre>*(a.begin() + n)
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Surely that's meant to be "operational semantics?"
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<caption>Table 90: Optional sequence container operations</caption>
<tbody><tr>
<th>expression</th> <th>return type</th> <th><del>assertion/note<br>pre/post-condition</del><br> <ins>operational semantics</ins></th> <th>container</th>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="726"></a>726. Missing <tt>regex_replace()</tt> overloads</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Two overloads of <tt>regex_replace()</tt> are currently provided:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, 
    class traits, class charT&gt; 
  OutputIterator 
  regex_replace(OutputIterator out, 
                BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);
 
template &lt;class traits, class charT&gt; 
  basic_string&lt;charT&gt; 
  regex_replace(const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; s, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);
</pre></blockquote>

<ol>
<li>Overloads taking <tt>const charT *</tt> are provided for <tt>regex_match()</tt> and
<tt>regex_search()</tt>, but not <tt>regex_replace()</tt>.  This is inconsistent.</li>
<li>
<p>The absence of <tt>const charT *</tt> overloads prevents ordinary-looking code from compiling, such as:</p>

<blockquote><pre>const string s("kitten");
const regex r("en");
cout &lt;&lt; regex_replace(s, r, "y") &lt;&lt; endl;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The compiler error message will be something like "could not deduce
template argument for 'const std::basic_string&lt;_Elem&gt; &amp;' from 'const
char[1]'".
</p>

<p>
Users expect that anything taking a <tt>basic_string&lt;charT&gt;</tt> can also take a
<tt>const charT *</tt>.  In their own code, when they write a function taking
<tt>std::string</tt> (or <tt>std::wstring</tt>), they can pass a <tt>const char *</tt> (or <tt>const
wchar_t *</tt>), thanks to <tt>basic_string</tt>'s implicit constructor.  Because the
regex algorithms are templated on <tt>charT</tt>, they can't rely on
<tt>basic_string</tt>'s implicit constructor (as the compiler error message
indicates, template argument deduction fails first).
</p>

<p>
If a user figures out what the compiler error message means, workarounds
are available - but they are all verbose.  Explicit template arguments
could be given to <tt>regex_replace()</tt>, allowing <tt>basic_string</tt>'s implicit
constructor to be invoked - but <tt>charT</tt> is the last template argument, not
the first, so this would be extremely verbose.  Therefore, constructing
a <tt>basic_string</tt> from each C string is the simplest workaround.
</p>
</li>

<li>
There is an efficiency consideration: constructing <tt>basic_string</tt>s can
impose performance costs that could be avoided by a library
implementation taking C strings and dealing with them directly. 
(Currently, for replacement sources, C strings can be converted into
iterator pairs at the cost of verbosity, but for format strings, there
is no way to avoid constructing a <tt>basic_string</tt>.)
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We note that Boost already has these overloads. However, the proposed
wording is provided only for 28.11.4 [re.alg.replace]; wording is needed for the synopsis
as well. We also note that this has impact on <tt>match_results::format</tt>,
which may require further overloads.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Daniel to tweak for us.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-25 Daniel tweaks both this issue and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is solved by the proposed resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave Open. Though we believe this is solved by the proposed resolution
to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-27 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. 
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#727">727</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Provide additional overloads for <tt>regex_replace()</tt>: one additional
overload of the iterator-based form (taking <tt>const charT* fmt</tt>), and three
additional overloads of the convenience form (one taking <tt>const charT*
str</tt>, another taking <tt>const charT* fmt</tt>, and the third taking both <tt>const
charT* str</tt> and <tt>const charT* fmt</tt>).  28.11.4 [re.alg.replace]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template &lt;class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, 
    class traits, class charT&gt; 
  OutputIterator 
  regex_replace(OutputIterator out, 
                BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);

<ins>template &lt;class OutputIterator, class BidirectionalIterator, 
    class traits, class charT&gt; 
  OutputIterator 
  regex_replace(OutputIterator out, 
                BidirectionalIterator first, BidirectionalIterator last, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const charT* fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);</ins>
</pre>
<p>...</p>
<pre>template &lt;class traits, class charT&gt; 
  basic_string&lt;charT&gt; 
  regex_replace(const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; s, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);

<ins>template &lt;class traits, class charT&gt; 
  basic_string&lt;charT&gt; 
  regex_replace(const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; s, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const charT* fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);</ins>

<ins>template &lt;class traits, class charT&gt; 
  basic_string&lt;charT&gt; 
  regex_replace(const charT* s, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const basic_string&lt;charT&gt;&amp; fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);</ins>

<ins>template &lt;class traits, class charT&gt; 
  basic_string&lt;charT&gt; 
  regex_replace(const charT* s, 
                const basic_regex&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp; e, 
                const charT* fmt, 
                regex_constants::match_flag_type flags = 
                  regex_constants::match_default);</ins>
</pre>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="729"></a>729. Problem in [rand.req.eng]/3</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The 3rd table row in 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng]/3 requires random number engines to accept any 
arithmetic type as a seed, which is then casted to the engine's <tt>result_type</tt> and subsequently 
used for seeding the state of the engine. The requirement stated as "Creates an engine with 
initial state determined by <tt>static_cast&lt;X::result_type&gt;(s)</tt>" forces random number engines 
to either use a seeding method that completely depends on the <tt>result_type</tt> (see the discussion 
of seeding for the <tt>mersenne_twister_engine</tt> in point T2 above) or at least to throw away "bits 
of randomness" in the seed value if the <tt>result_type</tt> is smaller than the seed type. This seems 
to be inappropriate for many modern random number generators, in particular F2-linear or 
cryptographic ones, which operate on an internal bit array that in principle is independent of the 
type of numbers returned.
</p>

<p>
<b>Posible resolution:</b> I propose to change the wording to a version similar to "Creates an 
engine with initial state determined by <tt>static_cast&lt;UintType&gt;(s)</tt>, where <tt>UintType</tt> is an 
implementation specific unsigned integer type."
</p>

<p>
Additionally, the definition of s in 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng]/1 c) could be restricted to unsigned integer types.
</p>

<p>
Similarly, the type of the seed in 26.5.1.5 [rand.req.adapt]/3 e) could be left unspecified.
</p>

<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>[
Stephan Tolksdorf adds pre-Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
In reply to the discussion in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a>
regarding this issue:
</p>
<p>
The descriptions of all engines and engine adaptors given in sections
26.5.3 [rand.eng] and 26.5.4 [rand.adapt] already specify the concrete
types of the integer arguments for seeding. Hence, relaxing the general
requirement in 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng] would not affect portability and
reproducibility of the standard library. Furthermore, it is not clear to
me what exactly the guarantee "with initial state determined by
<tt>static_cast&lt;X::result_type&gt;(s)</tt>" is useful for. On the other hand,
relaxing the requirement would allow developers to implement  other
random number engines that do not have to cast all arithmetic seed
arguments to their result_types.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Propose close NAD for the reasons given in N2424.
</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 further discussion.
</p>

<p><i>[
Stephan Tolksdorf adds pre-Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Change row 3 of table 105 "Random number engine requirements" in 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng]/3
</p>

<blockquote>
Creates an engine with initial state determined by
<tt><del>static_cast&lt;X::result_type&gt;(</del>s<del>)</del></tt>
</blockquote>

<p>
Similarly, change 26.5.1.5 [rand.req.adapt]/3 e)
</p>

<blockquote>
When <tt>X::X</tt> is invoked with <del>an <tt>X::result_type</tt></del> value <tt>s</tt>
<ins>of arithmetic type (3.9.1)</ins>, ...
</blockquote>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="730"></a>730. Comment on [rand.req.adapt]/3 e)</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.1.5 [rand.req.adapt] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
If an engine adaptor is invoked with an argument of type <tt>seed_seq</tt>, then all base 
engines are specified to be seeded with this <tt>seed_seq</tt>. As <tt>seed_seq</tt>'s randomization method is 
qualified as constant, this procedure will ef fectively initialize all base engines with the same seed 
(though the resulting state might still dif fer to a certain degree if the engines are of different types). 
It is not clear whether this mode of operation is in general appropriate, hence -- as far as the 
stated requirements are of general nature and not just specific to the engine adaptors provided by 
the library -- it might be better to leave the behaviour unspecified, since the current definition of 
<tt>seed_seq</tt> does not allow for a generally satisfying specification.
</p>

<p>
<b>Posssible resolution:</b> [As above]
</p>

<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>
Close NAD for the reasons given in N2424.
</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="731"></a>731. proposal for a customizable <tt>seed_seq</tt></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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The proper way to seed random number engines seems to be the most frequently 
discussed issue of the 26.5 [rand] proposal. While the new <tt>seed_seq</tt> approach is already rather 
general and probably sufficient for most situations, it is unlikely to be optimal in every case (one 
problem was pointed out in point T5 above). In some situations it might, for instance, be better to 
seed the state with a cryptographic generator. 
</p>
<p>
In my opinion this is a pretty strong argument for extending the standard with a simple facility to 
customize the seeding procedure. This could, for example, be done with the following minimal 
changes:
</p>

<p>
<b>Possible resolution:</b>
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
Turn the interface specification of 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq]/2 into a "SeedSeq" requirement, where the 
exact behaviour of the constructors and the randomize method are left unspecified and where the
const qualification for randomize is removed. Classes implementing this interface are additionally 
required to specialize the traits class in c).
</li>
<li>
Provide the class <tt>seed_seq</tt> as a default implementation of the SeedSeq interface.
</li>
<li>
<p>
Supplement the <tt>seed_seq</tt> with a traits class
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;typename T&gt; 
struct is_seed_seq { static const bool value = false; }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>and the specialization</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;&gt; 
struct is_seed_seq&lt;seed_seq&gt; { static const bool value = true; }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>which users can supplement with further specializations.</p>
</li>
<li>
Change 26.5.1.4 [rand.req.eng]/1 d) to "q is an lvalue of a type that fulfils the SeedSeq requirements", and 
modify the constructors and seed methods in 26.5.3 [rand.eng] appropriately (the actual implementation 
could be done using the SFINAE technique).
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
See N2424. Close NAD but note that "conceptizing" the library may cause
this problem to be solved by that route.
</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="732"></a>732. Defect in [rand.dist.samp.genpdf]</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [rand.dist.samp.genpdf] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.dist.samp.genpdf">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.genpdf].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#795">795</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
X [rand.dist.samp.genpdf] describes the interface for a distribution template that is 
meant to simulate random numbers from any general distribution given only the density and the 
support of the distribution. I'm not aware of any general purpose algorithm that would be capable 
of correctly and efficiently implementing the described functionality. From what I know, this is 
essentially an unsolved research problem. Existing algorithms either require more knowledge 
about the distribution and the problem domain or work only under very limited circumstances. 
Even the state of the art special purpose library UNU.RAN does not solve the problem in full 
generality, and in any case, testing and customer support for such a library feature would be a 
nightmare.
</p>

<p>
<b>Possible resolution:</b> For these reasons, I propose to delete section X [rand.dist.samp.genpdf].
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Disagreement persists.
</p>
<p>
Objection to this issue is that this function takes a general functor.
The general approach would be to normalize this function, integrate it,
and take the inverse of the integral, which is not possible in general.
An example function is sin(1+n*x) -- for any spatial frequency that the
implementor chooses, there is a value of n that renders that choice
arbitrarily erroneous.
</p>
<p>
Correction: The formula above should instead read 1+sin(n*x).
</p>
<p>
Objector proposes the following possible compromise positions:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
rand.dist.samp.genpdf takes an number of points so that implementor need not guess.
</li>
<li>
replace rand.disk.samp.genpdf with an extension to either or both of the discrete functions to take arguments that take a functor and number of points in place of the list of probabilities. Reference issues 793 and 794.
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2813.pdf">N2813</a>
for the proposed resolution.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="733"></a>733. Comment on [rand.req.dist]/9</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.1.6 [rand.req.dist] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The requirement "P shall have a declaration of the form <tt>typedef X distribution_- 
type</tt>" effectively makes the use of inheritance for implementing distributions very inconvenient, 
because the child of a distribution class in general will not satisfy this requirement. In my opinion 
the benefits of having a typedef in the parameter class pointing back to the distribution class are 
not worth the hassle this requirement causes. [In my code base I never made use of the nested 
typedef but on several occasions could have profited from being able to use simple inheritance for 
the implementation of a distribution class.]
</p>

<p>
<b>Proposed resolution:</b> I propose to drop this requirement.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Close NAD for the reasons given in N2424. In practice it is not inconvenient to meet these requirements.
</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="735"></a>735. Unfortunate naming</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.2.2 [rand.dist.bern.bin], 26.5.8.2.4 [rand.dist.bern.negbin] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In my opinion the choice of name for the <tt>t</tt> parameter of the <tt>binomial_distribution</tt>
is very unfortunate. In virtually every internet reference, book and software implementation 
this parameter is called <tt>n</tt> instead, see for example Wikipedia, Mathworld, Evans et al. (1993) 
Statistical Distributions, 2nd E., Wiley, p. 38, the R statistical computing language, p. 926, 
Mathematica and Matlab.
</p>

<p>
Similarly, the choice of <tt>k</tt> for the parameter of the negative binomial distributions is rather unusual. 
The most common choice for the negative binomial distribution seems to be <tt>r</tt> instead.
</p>

<p>
Choosing unusual names for the parameters causes confusion among users and makes the 
interface unnecessarily inconvenient to use.
</p>

<p>
<b>Possible resolution:</b> For these reasons, I propose to change the name of the respective parameters
to <tt>n</tt> and <tt>r</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
In N2424. NAD It has been around for a while. It is hardly universal,
there is prior art, and this would confuse people.
</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="736"></a>736. Comment on [rand.dist.samp.discrete]</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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.dist.samp.discrete">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.discrete].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
The specification for <tt>discrete_distribution</tt> requires the member <tt>probabilities()</tt>
to return a vector of <i>standardized</i> probabilities, which forces the implementation every time to 
divide each probability by the sum of all probabilities, as the sum will in practice almost never be 
exactly 1.0. This is unnecessarily inef ficient as the implementation would otherwise not need to 
compute the standardized probabilities at all and could instead work with the non-standardized 
probabilities and the sum. If there was no standardization the user would just get back the 
probabilities that were previously supplied to the distribution object, which to me seems to be the 
more obvious solution.
</li>
<li>
The behaviour of <tt>discrete_distribution</tt> is not specified in case the number of given
probabilities is larger than the maximum number representable by the IntType.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
<b>Possible resolution:</b> I propose to change the specification such that the non-standardized 
probabilities need to be returned and that an additional requirement is included for the number 
of probabilities to be smaller than the maximum of IntType.
</p>

<p><i>[
Stephan Tolksdorf adds pre-Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
In reply to the discussion in 
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a>
of this issue:
</p>
<p>
Rescaled floating-point parameter vectors can not be expected to compare
equal because of the limited precision of floating-point numbers.
My proposal would at least guarantee that a parameter
vector (of type double) passed into the distribution would compare equal
with the one returned by the <tt>probabilities()</tt> method. Furthermore, I do
not understand why "the changed requirement would lead to a significant
increase in the amount of state in the distribution object". A typical
implementation's state would increase by exactly one number: the sum of
all probabilities. The textual representation for serialization would
not need to grow at all. Finally, the proposed replacement "<tt>0 &lt; n &lt;=
numeric_limits&lt;IntType&gt;::max() + 1</tt>" makes the implementation
unnecessarily complicated, "<tt>0 &lt; n &lt;= numeric_limits&lt;IntType&gt;::max()</tt>"
would be better.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
In N2424. We agree with the observation and the proposed resolution to
part b). We recommend the wording n &gt; 0 be replaced with 0 &lt; n
numeric_limits::max() + 1. However, we disagree with part a), as it
would interfere with the definition of parameters' equality. Further,
the changed requirement would lead to a significant increase in the
amount of state of the distribution object.
</p>

<p>
As it stands now, it is convenient, and the changes proposed make it
much less so.
</p>

<p>
NAD. Part a the current behavior is desirable. Part b, any constructor
can fail, but the rules under which it can fail do not need to be listed
here.
</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 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete]:
</p>

<p>
Proposed wording a):
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Changae in para. 2
</p>

<blockquote>
Constructs a <tt>discrete_distribution</tt> object with <tt>n=1</tt> and <tt>p<sub>0</sub> <ins>= w<sub>0</sub></ins> = 1</tt>
</blockquote>

<p>
and change in para. 5
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> A <tt>vector&lt;double&gt;</tt> whose <tt>size</tt> member returns <tt>n</tt> and whose
<tt>operator[]</tt> member returns <del><tt>p<sub>k</sub></tt></del>
<ins>the weight <tt>w<sub>k</sub></tt> as a double value</ins>
when invoked with argument <tt>k</tt> for <tt>k = 0,
..., n-1</tt>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Proposed wording b):
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Change in para. 3:
</p>

<blockquote>
If <tt>firstW == lastW</tt>, let the sequence <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n = 1</tt> and consist
of the single value <tt>w<sub>0</sub> = 1</tt>. Otherwise, <tt>[firstW,lastW)</tt> shall form a
sequence <tt>w</tt> of length <tt>n <del>&gt; 0</del></tt> 
<ins>such that <tt>0 &lt; n &lt;= numeric_limits&lt;IntType&gt;::max()</tt>,</ins>
and <tt>*firstW</tt> shall yield a value <tt>w<sub>0</sub></tt>
convertible to <tt>double</tt>. [<i>Note:</i> The values <tt>w<sub>k</sub></tt> are commonly known
as the weights . <i>-- end note</i>]
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="737"></a>737. Comment on [rand.dist.samp.pconst]</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
The discussion in point T11 above regarding <tt>probabilities()</tt> similarly applies 
to the method <tt>densities()</tt> of <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>.
</li>
<li>
<p>
The design of the constructor
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class InputIteratorB, class InputIteratorW&gt; 
piecewise_constant_distribution( InputIteratorB firstB, InputIteratorB lastB, 
                                 InputIteratorW firstW);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
is unnecessarily unsafe, as there is no separate end-iterator given for the weights. I can't see 
any performance or convenience reasons that would justify the risks inherent in such a function 
interface, in particular the risk that input error might go unnoticed.
</p>
</li>
</ol>

<p>
<b>Possible resolution:</b> I propose to add an <tt>InputIteratorW lastW</tt> argument to the interface.
</p>

<p><i>[
Stephan Tolksdorf adds pre-Bellevue:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
In reply to the discussion in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2424.pdf">N2424</a>
I'd like to make the same comments as for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#736">736</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
In N2424. There is already precedent elsewhere in the library. Follows existing convention. NAD.
</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 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]:
</p>

<p>
Proposed wording a)
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Change in para. 2
</p>
<blockquote>
Constructs a <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> object with <tt>n = 1</tt>, <tt>p<sub>0</sub> <ins>= w<sub>0</sub></ins> = 1</tt>,
<tt>b<sub>0</sub> = 0</tt>, and <tt>b<sub>1</sub> = 1</tt>
</blockquote>

<p>
and change in para. 5
</p>

<blockquote>
A <tt>vector&lt;result_type&gt;</tt> whose <tt>size</tt> member returns <tt>n</tt> and whose <tt>operator[]</tt>
member returns <del><tt>p<sub>k</sub></tt></del>
<ins>the weight <tt>w<sub>k</sub></tt> as a double value</ins>
when invoked with argument <tt>k</tt> for <tt>k = 0, ..., n-1</tt>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Proposed wording b)
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Change both occurrences of
</p>

<blockquote>
"piecewise_constant_distribution(InputIteratorB firstB, InputIteratorB lastB,
                                 InputIteratorW firstW<ins>, InputIteratorW lastW</ins>)
</blockquote>

<p>
and change in para. 3
</p>

<blockquote>
<del>the length of the sequence <tt>w</tt> starting from <tt>firstW</tt> shall be at least <tt>n</tt>,
<tt>*firstW</tt> shall return a value <tt>w<sub>0</sub></tt> that is convertible to <tt>double</tt>, and any
<tt>w<sub>k</sub></tt> for <tt>k &gt;= n</tt> shall be ignored by the distribution</del>
<ins><tt>[firstW, lastW)</tt> shall form a sequence <tt>w</tt> of length <tt>n</tt> whose leading element
<tt>w<sub>0</sub></tt> shall be convertible to <tt>double</tt></ins>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>


</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="738"></a>738. Editorial issue in [rand.adapt.disc]/3</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.4.1 [rand.adapt.disc] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.adapt.disc">issues</a> in [rand.adapt.disc].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Since the template parameter <tt>p</tt> and <tt>r</tt> are of type <tt>size_t</tt>, the member <tt>n</tt> in the class 
exposition should have type <tt>size_t</tt>, too.
</p>


<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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="739"></a>739. Defect in [rand.util.canonical]/3</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The complexity of <tt>generate_canonical</tt> is specified to be "exactly k=max(1, ceil(b/log2 
R)) invocations of g". This terms involves a logarithm that is not rounded and hence can not (in 
general) be computed at compile time. As this function template is performance critical, I propose 
to replace ceil(b/log2 R) with ceil(b/floor(log2 R)).
</p>

<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>
In N2424. Close NAD as described there.
</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>





<hr>
<h3><a name="741"></a>741. Const-incorrect <tt>get_deleter</tt> function for <tt>shared_ptr</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.10.2.11 [util.smartptr.getdeleter] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-09-27 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The following issue was raised by Alf P. Steinbach in c.l.c++.mod:
</p>

<p>
According to the recent draft N2369, both the header memory synopsis
of 20.9 [memory] and 20.9.10.2.11 [util.smartptr.getdeleter] declare:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class D, class T&gt; D* get_deleter(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt; const&amp; p);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This allows to retrieve the pointer to a mutable deleter of a <tt>const
shared_ptr</tt> (if that owns one) and therefore contradicts the usual
philosophy that associated functors are either read-only (e.g.
<tt>key_comp</tt> or <tt>value_comp</tt> of <tt>std::map</tt>) or do at least reflect
the mutability of the owner (as seen for the both overloads of
<tt>unique_ptr::get_deleter</tt>).
Even the next similar counter-part of <tt>get_deleter</tt> - the two
overloads of <tt>function::target</tt> in the class template function
synopsis 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] or in 20.8.14.2.5 [func.wrap.func.targ] - do
properly mirror the const-state of the owner.
</p>

<b>Possible proposed resolutions:</b>

<p>
Replace the declarations of <tt>get_deleter</tt> in the header <tt>&lt;memory&gt;</tt>
synopsis of 20.9 [memory] and in 20.9.10.2.11 [util.smartptr.getdeleter] by one of the
following alternatives (A) or (B):
</p>

<ol type="A">
<li>
Provide <b>only</b> the immutable variant. This would reflect the
current praxis of <tt>container::get_allocator()</tt>, <tt>map::key_comp()</tt>, or
<tt>map::value_comp</tt>.

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class D, class T&gt; const D* get_deleter(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt; const&amp; p);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
Just remove the function.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
Alberto Ganesh Barbati adds:
</p>

<ol type="A" start="3">
<li>
<p>
Replace it with two functions:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class D, class T&gt; D get_deleter(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt; const&amp;);
template &lt;class D, class T&gt; bool has_deleter(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt; const&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The first one would throw if <tt>D</tt> is the wrong type, while the latter would
never throw. This approach would reflect the current praxis of
<tt>use_facet/has_facet</tt>, with the twist of returning the deleter by value as
<tt>container::get_allocator()</tt> do.
</p>
</li>
</ol>

<p>
Peter Dimov adds:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
My favorite option is "not a defect". A, B and C break useful code.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Concern this is similar to confusing "pointer to const" with "a constant pointer".
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="745"></a>745. copy_exception API slices.</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
It could be I did not understand the design rationale, but I thought
copy_exception would produce an exception_ptr to the most-derived (dynamic)
type of the passed exception.  Instead it slices, which appears to be less
useful, and a likely source of FAQ questions in the future.
</p>
<p>
(Peter Dimov suggests NAD)
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue: 
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
How could this be implemented in a way that the dynamic type is cloned?
</p>
<p>
The feature is designed to create an exception_ptr from an object whose
static type is identical to the dynamic type and thus there is no
slicing involved.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="747"></a>747. We have 3 separate type traits to identify classes supporting no-throw operations</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
We have 3 separate type traits to identify classes supporting no-throw
operations, which are very useful when trying to provide exception safety
guarantees.  However, I'm not entirely clear on what the current wording
requires of a conforming implementation.  To quote from
<tt>has_nothrow_default_constructor</tt>:
</p>
<blockquote><p>
or <tt>T</tt> is a class type with a default constructor that is known not to throw
any exceptions
</p></blockquote>
<p>
What level of magic do we expect to deduce if this is known?
</p>
<p>
E.g.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>struct test{
 int x;
 test() : x() {}
};
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Should I expect a conforming compiler to 
 <tt>assert( has_nothrow_constructor&lt;test&gt;::value )</tt>
</p>
<p>
Is this a QoI issue?
</p>
<p>
Should I expect to 'know' only if-and-only-if there is an inline definition
available?
</p>
<p>
Should I never expect that to be true, and insist that the user supplies an
empty throw spec if they want to assert the no-throw guarantee?
</p>
<p>
It would be helpful to maybe have a footnote explaining what is required,
but right now I don't know what to suggest putting in the footnote.
</p>
<p>
(agreement since is that trivial ops and explicit no-throws are required.
Open if QoI should be allowed to detect further)
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This looks like a QoI issue.
In the case of trivial and nothrow it is known. Static analysis of the program is definitely into QoI.
Move to OPEN. Need to talk to Core about this.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is QoI.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="748"></a>748. The is_abstract type trait is defined by reference to 10.4.</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I am trying to decide is a pure virtual function is a <i>necessary</i> as well as
sufficient requirement to be classified as abstract?
</p>
<p>
For instance, is the following (non-polymorphic) type considered abstract?
</p>
<blockquote><pre>struct abstract {
protected:
 abstract(){}
 abstract( abstract const &amp; ) {}
 ~abstract() {}
};
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
(Suggested that this may be NAD, with an editorial fix-up from Pete on the
core wording to make clear that abstract requires a pure virtual function)
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Core has clarified that the definition abstract is adequate. Issue withdrawn by submitter. NAD.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="750"></a>750. The current definition for <tt>is_convertible</tt> requires that the type be
implicitly convertible, so explicit constructors are ignored.</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#Dup">Dup</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.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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#719">719</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
With the pending arrival of explicit conversion functions though, I'm
wondering if we want an additional trait, <tt>is_explictly_convertible</tt>?
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
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.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Duplicate of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#719">719</a> (for our purposes).
</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><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="751"></a>751. change pass-by-reference members of <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> to pass-by-value?</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
A number of vector&lt;bool&gt; members take const bool&amp; as arguments.
Is there any chance we could change them to pass-by-value or would I 
be wasting everyone's time if wrote up an issue?
</p>

<p><i>[
post Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
As we understand it, the original requester (Martin Sebor) would like
for implementations to be permitted to pass-by-value. Alisdair suggests
that if this is to be resolved, it should be resolved more generally,
e.g. in other containers as well.
</p>
<p>
We note that this would break ABI. However, we also suspect that this
might be covered under the "as-if" rule in section 1.9.
</p>
<p>
Many in the group feel that for vector&lt;bool&gt;, this is a "don't care",
and that at this point in the process it's not worth the bandwidth.
</p>
<p>
Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#679">679</a> -- which was in ready status pre-Bellevue and is
now in the working paper -- is related to this, though not a duplicate.
</p>
<p>
Moving to Open with a task for Alisdair to craft a informative note to
be put whereever appropriate in the WP. This note would clarify places
where pass-by-const-ref can be transformed to pass-by-value under the
as-if rule.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is really a clause 17 issue, rather than something specific to vector&lt;bool&gt;.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open. Alisdair to provide a resolution. Alternately, Howard can
close this as NAD and then open a new issue to handle the general issue
(rather than the vector&lt;bool&gt; one).
</p>
<p>
Howard:  Haven't yet opened new issue.  Lacking wording for it.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD.  Insufficient motivation to make any changes.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="754"></a>754. Ambiguous return clause for <tt>std::uninitialized_copy</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2007-10-15 <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#uninitialized.copy">issues</a> in [uninitialized.copy].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
14882-2003, [lib.uninitialized.copy] is currently written as follows:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template &lt;class InputIterator, class ForwardIterator&gt;
  ForwardIterator uninitialized_copy(InputIterator <i>first</i>, InputIterator <i>last</i>,
                                     ForwardIterator <i>result</i>);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-1- <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>for (; first != last; ++result, ++first)
  new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(&amp;*result))
    typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::value_type(*first);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
-2- <i>Returns:</i> <tt><i>result</i></tt>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
similarily for N2369, and its corresponding section
20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy].
</p>

<p>
It's not clear to me what the return clause is supposed to mean, I see
two
possible interpretations:
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
The notion of <tt><i>result</i></tt> is supposed to mean the value given by the
function parameter <tt><i>result</i></tt> [Note to the issue editor: Please use italics for
<tt><i>result</i></tt>].
This seems somewhat implied by recognizing that both the function
parameter
and the name used in the clause do have the same italic font.
</li>
<li>
The notion of "result" is supposed to mean the value of <tt><i>result</i></tt>
after the
preceding effects clause. This is in fact what all implementations I
checked
do (and which is probably it's intend, because it matches the
specification of <tt>std::copy</tt>).
</li>
</ol>

<p>
The problem is: I see nothing in the standard which grants that this
interpretation
is correct, specifically [lib.structure.specifications] or
17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications]
resp. do not clarify which "look-up" rules apply for names found in
the elements
of the detailed specifications - Do they relate to the corresponding
synopsis or
to the effects clause (or possibly other elements)? Fortunately most
detailed
descriptions are unambigious in this regard, e.g. this problem does
not apply
for <tt>std::copy</tt>.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the wording of the return clause to say (20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy]):
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-2- <i>Returns:</i> <ins>The value of</ins> <tt><i>result</i></tt> <ins>after effects have taken place.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Resolution: NAD editorial -- project editor to decide if change is
worthwhile. Concern is that there are many other places this might
occur.
</blockquote>




<hr>
<h3><a name="756"></a>756. Container adaptors push</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
After n2369 we have a single <tt>push_back</tt> overload in the sequence containers,
of the "emplace" type. At variance with that, still in n2461, we have
two separate overloads, the C++03 one + one taking an rvalue reference
in the container adaptors. Therefore, simply from a consistency point of
view, I was wondering whether the container adaptors should be aligned
with the specifications of the sequence container themselves: thus have
a single <tt>push</tt> along the lines:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename... _Args&gt;
void
push(_Args&amp;&amp;... __args)
  { c.push_back(std::forward&lt;_Args&gt;(__args)...); }
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#767">767</a>
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 23.5.1.1 [queue.defn]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>void push(const value_type&amp; x) { c.push_back(x); }</del>
<del>void push(value_type&amp;&amp; x) { c.push_back(std::move(x)); }</del>
<ins>template&lt;class... Args&gt; void push(Args&amp;&amp;... args) { c.push_back(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...); }</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.5.2 [priority.queue]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>void push(const value_type&amp; x) { c.push_back(x); }</del>
<del>void push(value_type&amp;&amp; x) { c.push_back(std::move(x)); }</del>
<ins>template&lt;class... Args&gt; void push(Args&amp;&amp;... args) { c.push_back(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...); }</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.5.2.3 [priqueue.members]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre><del>void push(const value_type&amp; x);</del>
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<del><i>Effects:</i></del>
</p>
<blockquote><pre><del>c.push_back(x);</del>
<del>push_heap(c.begin(), c.end(), comp);</del>
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<pre><ins>template&lt;class... Args&gt;</ins> void push(<del>value_type</del> <ins>Args</ins>&amp;&amp;<ins>...</ins> <del>x</del> <ins>args</ins>);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>c.push_back(std::<del>move</del><ins>forward&lt;Args&gt;</ins>(<del>x</del> <ins>args</ins>)<ins>...</ins>);
push_heap(c.begin(), c.end(), comp);
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>void push(const value_type&amp; x) { c.push_back(x); }</del>
<del>void push(value_type&amp;&amp; x) { c.push_back(std::move(x)); }</del>
<ins>template&lt;class... Args&gt; void push(Args&amp;&amp;... args) { c.push_back(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...); }</ins>
</pre></blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2680.pdf">N2680 Proposed Wording for Placement Insert (Revision 1)</a>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="757"></a>757. Typo in the synopsis of vector</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2007-11-04 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In the synopsis 23.4.1 [vector], there is the signature:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, T&amp;&amp; x);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
instead of:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator insert(const_iterator position, T&amp;&amp; x);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers] is fine.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in 23.4.1 [vector]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator insert(const_iterator position, const T&amp; x); 
<ins>iterator insert(const_iterator position, T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
void     insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, const T&amp; x); 
<del>void     insert(const_iterator position, size_type n, T&amp;&amp; x);</del>
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="760"></a>760. The emplace issue</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paolo Carlini <b>Opened:</b> 2007-11-11 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In an emplace member function the function parameter pack may be bound
to a priori unlimited number of objects: some or all of them can be
elements of the container itself. Apparently, in order to conform to the
blanket statement 23.2 [container.requirements]/11, the
implementation must check all of them for that possibility. A possible
solution can involve extending the exception in 23.2 [container.requirements]/12 also to the emplace member. As a
side note, the <tt>push_back</tt> and <tt>push_front</tt> member
functions are luckily not affected by this problem, can be efficiently
implemented anyway
</p>

<p><i>[
Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#767">767</a>
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The proposed addition (13) is partially redundant with the existing
paragraph 12. Why was the qualifier "rvalues" added to paragraph 12? Why
does it not cover subelements and pointers?
</p>
<p>
Resolution: Alan Talbot to rework language, then set state to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The problem is broader than emplace. The LWG doesn't
feel that it knows how to write wording that prohibits all of the
problematic use cases at this time.
</p>
<p>
NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add after 23.2 [container.requirements]/12:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-12- Objects passed to member functions of a container as rvalue
references shall not be elements of that container. No diagnostic
required.
</p>
<p>
<ins>
-13- Objects bound to the function parameter pack of the
<tt>emplace</tt> member function shall not be elements or sub-objects of
elements of the container. No diagnostic required.
</ins>
</p>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="763"></a>763. Renaming <tt>emplace()</tt> overloads</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sylvain Pion <b>Opened:</b> 2007-12-04 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The associative containers provide 2 overloads of <tt>emplace()</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class... Args&gt; pair&lt;iterator, bool&gt; emplace(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class... Args&gt; iterator emplace(const_iterator position, Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This is a problem if you mean the first overload while passing
a <tt>const_iterator</tt> as first argument.
</p>

<p><i>[
Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#767">767</a>
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>
This can be disambiguated by passing "begin" as the first argument in
the case when the non-default choice is desired. We believe that desire
will be rare.
</p>
<p>
Resolution: Change state to NAD.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Rename one of the two overloads.
For example to <tt>emplace_here</tt>, <tt>hint_emplace</tt>...
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="764"></a>764. <tt>equal_range</tt> on unordered containers should return a <tt>pair</tt> of <tt>local_iterators</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2007-11-29 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
    A major attribute of the unordered containers is that iterating 
though them inside a bucket is very fast while iterating between buckets 
can be much slower.  If an unordered container has a low load factor, 
iterating between the last iterator in one bucket and the next iterator, 
which is in another bucket, is <tt>O(bucket_count())</tt> which may be much 
larger than <tt>O(size())</tt>.
</p>
<p>
    If <tt>b</tt> is an non-const unordered container of type <tt>B</tt> and <tt>k</tt> is an 
object of it's <tt>key_type</tt>, then <tt>b.equal_range(k)</tt> currently returns 
<tt>pair&lt;B::iterator, B::iterator&gt;</tt>. Consider the following code:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>B::iterator lb, ub;
tie(lb, ub) = b.equal_range(k);
for (B::iterator it = lb; it != ub; ++it) {
        // Do something with *it
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
If <tt>b.equal_range(k)</tt> returns a non-empty range (i.e. <tt>b</tt> contains at least 
on element whose key is equivalent to <tt>k</tt>), then every iterator in the 
half-open range <tt>[lb, ub)</tt> will be in the same bucket, but <tt>ub</tt> will likely 
either be in a different bucket or be equal to <tt>b.end()</tt>.  In either case, 
iterating between <tt>ub - 1</tt> and <tt>ub</tt> could take a much longer time than 
iterating through the rest of the range.
</p>
<p>
If instead of returning <tt>pair&lt;iterator, iterator&gt;</tt>, <tt>equal_range</tt> were to 
return <tt>pair&lt;local_iterator, local_iterator&gt;</tt>, then <tt>ub</tt> (which, like <tt>lb</tt>, 
would now be a <tt>local_iterator</tt>) could be guaranteed to always be in the 
same bucket as <tt>lb</tt>. In the cases where currently <tt>ub</tt> is equal to <tt>b.end()</tt>
or is in a different bucket, <tt>ub</tt> would be equal to <tt>b.end(b.bucket(key))</tt>. 
  This would make iterating between <tt>lb</tt> and <tt>ub</tt> much faster, as every 
iteration would be constant time.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposed resolution breaks consistency with other container types
for dubious benefit, and iterators are already constant time.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the entry for <tt>equal_range</tt> in Table 93 (23.2.5 [unord.req]) as follows:
</p>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<th>expression</th> <th>return type</th> <th>assertion/note pre/post-condition</th> <th>complexity</th>
</tr>

<tr>
<td><tt>b.equal_range(k)</tt></td>
<td><tt>pair&lt;<ins>local_</ins>iterator,<ins>local_</ins>iterator&gt;; pair&lt;const_<ins>local_</ins>iterator,const_<ins>local_</ins>iterator&gt;</tt> for <tt>const b</tt>.</td>
<td>Returns a range containing all elements with keys equivalent to <tt>k</tt>. Returns <tt>make_pair(b.end(<ins>b.bucket(key)</ins>),b.end(<ins>b.bucket(key)</ins>))</tt> if no such elements exist.</td>
<td>Average case &#920;<tt>(b.count(k))</tt>. Worst case &#920;<tt>(b.size())</tt>. </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>





<hr>
<h3><a name="767"></a>767. Forwarding and backward compatibility</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sylvain Pion <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Playing with g++'s C++0X mode, I noticed that the following
code, which used to compile:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;vector&gt;

int main()
{
    std::vector&lt;char *&gt; v;
    v.push_back(0);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
now fails with the following error message:
</p>

<blockquote>
.../include/c++/4.3.0/ext/new_allocator.h: In member function 'void __gnu_cxx::new_allocator&lt;_Tp&gt;::construct(_Tp*, _Args&amp;&amp; ...) [with _Args = int, _Tp = char*]':
.../include/c++/4.3.0/bits/stl_vector.h:707:   instantiated from 'void std::vector&lt;_Tp, _Alloc&gt;::push_back(_Args&amp;&amp; ...) [with _Args = int, _Tp = char*, _Alloc = std::allocator&lt;char*&gt;]'
test.cpp:6:   instantiated from here
.../include/c++/4.3.0/ext/new_allocator.h:114: error: invalid conversion from 'int' to 'char*'
</blockquote>

<p>
As far as I know, g++ follows the current draft here.
</p>
<p>
Does the committee really intend to break compatibility for such cases?
</p>

<p><i>[
Sylvain adds: 
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I just noticed that <tt>std::pair</tt> has the same issue.
The following now fails with GCC's -std=c++0x mode:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;utility&gt;

int main()
{
   std::pair&lt;char *, char *&gt; p (0,0);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
I have not made any general audit for such problems elsewhere.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#756">756</a>
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Motivation is to handle the old-style int-zero-valued NULL pointers.
Problem: this solution requires concepts in some cases, which some users
will be slow to adopt. Some discussion of alternatives involving
prohibiting variadic forms and additional library-implementation
complexity.
</p>
<p>
Discussion of "perfect world" solutions, the only such solution put
forward being to retroactively prohibit use of the integer zero for a
NULL pointer. This approach was deemed unacceptable given the large
bodies of pre-existing code that do use integer zero for a NULL pointer.
</p>
<p>
Another approach is to change the member names. Yet another approach is
to forbid the extension in absence of concepts.
</p>
<p>
Resolution: These issues (<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>, <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#763">763</a>) will be subsumed into a
paper to be produced by Alan Talbot in time for review at the 2008
meeting in France. Once this paper is produced, these issues will be
moved to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the following rows to Table 90 "Optional sequence container operations", 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<th>expression</th> <th>return type</th> <th>assertion/note<br>pre-/post-condition</th> <th>container</th>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>a.push_front(t)</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>void</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>a.insert(a.begin(), t)</tt><br>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.
</td>
<td>
<tt>list, deque</tt>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>a.push_front(rv)</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>void</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>a.insert(a.begin(), rv)</tt><br>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.
</td>
<td>
<tt>list, deque</tt>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>a.push_back(t)</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>void</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>a.insert(a.end(), t)</tt><br>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.
</td>
<td>
<tt>list, deque, vector, basic_string</tt>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>
<tt>a.push_back(rv)</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>void</tt>
</td>
<td>
<tt>a.insert(a.end(), rv)</tt><br>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.
</td>
<td>
<tt>list, deque, vector, basic_string</tt>
</td>
</tr>

</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change the synopsis in 23.3.2 [deque]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>void push_front(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_front(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_front(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_back(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>void push_front(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_front(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_front(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_back(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change the synopsis in 23.3.4 [list]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>void push_front(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_front(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_front(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_back(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.3.4.3 [list.modifiers]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>void push_front(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_front(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_front(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_back(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change the synopsis in 23.4.1 [vector]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>void push_back(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_back(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>void push_back(const T&amp; x);</ins>
<ins>void push_back(T&amp;&amp; x);</ins>
template &lt;class... Args&gt; <ins>requires Constructible&lt;T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt;</ins> void push_back(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2680.pdf">N2680 Proposed Wording for Placement Insert (Revision 1)</a>.
</p>

<p>
If there is still an issue with pair, Howard should submit another issue.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="773"></a>773. issues with random</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.1 [rand.dist.uni] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <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#rand.dist.uni">issues</a> in [rand.dist.uni].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
26.5.8.1.1 [rand.dist.uni.int] <tt>uniform_int</tt> constructor has changed the default
max constructor parameter from 9 (in TR1) to <tt>max()</tt>. The value
is arbitrary at best and shouldn't be lightly changed because
it breaks backward compatibility.
</li>

<li>
26.5.8.1.1 [rand.dist.uni.int] <tt>uniform_int</tt> has a parameter <tt>param</tt> that you can
provide on construction or <tt>operator()</tt>, set, and get. But there
is not even a hint of what this might be for.
</li>

<li>
26.5.8.1.2 [rand.dist.uni.real] <tt>uniform_real</tt>. Same issue as #2.
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD. Withdrawn.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="784"></a>784. unique_lock::release</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.4.2.2.3 [thread.lock.unique.mod] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Constantine Sapuntzakis <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-02 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>unique_lock::release</tt> will probably lead to many mistakes where people
call <tt>release</tt> instead of <tt>unlock</tt>. I just coded such a mistake using the
boost pre-1.35 threads library last week.
</p>

<p>
In many threading libraries, a call with <tt>release</tt> in it unlocks the
lock (e.g. ReleaseMutex in Win32, java.util.concurrent.Semaphore).
</p>

<p>
I don't call <tt>unique_lock::lock</tt> much at all, so I don't get to see the
symmetry between <tt>::lock</tt> and <tt>::unlock</tt>. I usually use the constructor to
lock the mutex. So I'm left to remember whether to call <tt>release</tt> or
<tt>unlock</tt> during the few times I need to release the mutex before the scope
ends. If I get it wrong, the compiler doesn't warn me.
</p>

<p>
An alternative name for release may be <tt>disown</tt>.
</p>

<p>
This might be a rare case where usability is hurt by consistency with
the rest of the C++ standard (e.g. <tt>std::auto_ptr::release</tt>).
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Change a name from release to disown. However prior art uses the release
name. Compatibility with prior art is more important that any possible
benefit such a change might make. We do not see the benefit for
changing. NAD
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in 30.4.2.2 [thread.lock.unique]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Mutex&gt; 
class unique_lock 
{ 
public:
   ...
   mutex_type* <del>release</del> <ins>disown</ins>();
   ...
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 30.4.2.2.3 [thread.lock.unique.mod]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>mutex_type *<del>release</del> <ins>disown</ins>();
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="785"></a>785. Random Number Requirements in TR1</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> TR1 5.1.4.5 [tr.rand.eng.disc], TR1 5.1.4.6 [tr.rand.eng.xor] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> John Maddock <b>Opened:</b> 2008-01-15 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Table 16 of TR1 requires that all Pseudo Random Number generators have a
</p>

<blockquote><pre>seed(integer-type s)
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
member function that is equivalent to:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>mygen = Generator(s)
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
But the generators <tt>xor_combine</tt> and <tt>discard_block</tt> have no such seed member, only the
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Gen&gt;
seed(Gen&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
member, which will not accept an integer literal as an argument: something that appears to violate the intent of Table 16.
</p>

<p>
So... is this a bug in TR1?
</p>

<p>
This is a real issue BTW, since the Boost implementation does adhere to the requirements of Table 16, while at least one commercial implementation does not and follows a strict adherence to sections 5.1.4.5 and 5.1.4.6 instead.
</p>

<p><i>[
Jens adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Both engines do have the necessary
constructor, therefore the omission of the <tt>seed()</tt> member
functions appears to be an oversight.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend NAD: <tt>xor_combine</tt> does no longer exist and <tt>discard_block[_engine]</tt>
has now the required seed overload accepting a <tt>result_type</tt>, which shall be an
unsigned integral type.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to NAD as recommended.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
NAD Recommended.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="790"></a>790. <tt>xor_combine::seed</tt> not specified</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>xor_combine::seed(result_type)</tt> and <tt>seed(seed_seq&amp;)</tt> don't say what
happens to each of the sub-engine seeds. (Should probably do the same
to both, unlike TR1.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Overcome by the previous proposal. NAD mooted by resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#789">789</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="791"></a>791. <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution::densities</tt> has wrong name</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>piecewise_constant_distribution::densities()</tt> should be <tt>probabilities()</tt>,
just like <tt>discrete_distribution</tt>. (There's no real use for weights divided
by areas.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Fermilab does not agree with this summary. As defined in the equation in
26.4.8.5.2/4, the quantities are indeed probability densities not
probabilities. Because we view this distribution as a parameterization
of a *probability density function*, we prefer to work in terms of
probability densities.
</p>

<p>
We don't think this should be changed.
</p>

<p>
If there is a technical argument about why the implementation dealing
with these values can't be as efficient as one dealing with
probabilities, we might reconsider. We don't care about this one member
function being somewhat more or less efficient; we care about the size
of the distribution object and the speed of the calls to generate
variates.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Change synopsis in 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class RealType = double&gt; 
class piecewise_constant_distribution 
{ 
public:
    ...
    vector&lt;double&gt; <del>densities</del> <ins>probabilities</ins>() const;
    ...
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]/6:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>vector&lt;double&gt; <del>densities</del> <ins>probabilities</ins>() const;
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="793"></a>793. <tt>discrete_distribution</tt> missing constructor</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.discrete">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.discrete].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>discrete_distribution</tt> should have a constructor like:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class _Fn&gt;
  discrete_distribution(result_type _Count, double _Low, double _High,
                        _Fn&amp; _Func);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
(Makes it easier to fill a histogram with function values over a range.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
How do you specify the function so that it does not return negative
values? If you do it is a bad construction. This requirement is already
there. Where in each bin does one evaluate the function? In the middle.
Need to revisit tomorrow.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Bill is not requesting this.
</p>
<p>
Marc Paterno: <tt>_Fn</tt> cannot return negative values at the points where the
function is sampled. It is sampled in the middle of each bin. <tt>_Fn</tt> cannot
return 0 everywhere it is sampled.
</p>
<p>
Jens: lambda expressions are rvalues
</p>
<p>
Add a library issue to provide an
<tt>initializer_list&lt;double&gt;</tt> constructor for
<tt>discrete_distribution</tt>.
</p>
<p>
Marc Paterno: dislikes reference for <tt>_Fn</tt> parameter. Make it pass-by-value (to use lambda),
use <tt>std::ref</tt> to wrap giant-state function objects.
</p>
<p>
Daniel: See <tt>random_shuffle</tt>, pass-by-rvalue-reference.
</p>
<p>
Daniel to draft wording.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Pre San Francisco, Daniel provided wording:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The here proposed changes of the WP refer to the current state of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2691.pdf">N2691</a>.
During the Sophia Antipolis meeting two different proposals came up
regarding the functor argument type, either by value or by rvalue-reference.
For consistence with existing conventions (state-free algorithms and the
<tt>general_pdf_distribution</tt> c'tor signature) the author decided to propose a
function argument that is provided by value. If severe concerns exists that
stateful functions would be of dominant relevance, it should be possible to
replace the two occurrences of <tt>Func</tt> by <tt>Func&amp;&amp;</tt> in this proposal as part
of an editorial process.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p><b>Non-concept version of the proposed resolution</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete]/1, class <tt>discrete_distribution</tt>, just
<em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit discrete_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
insert:
</p>


<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Func&gt;
discrete_distribution(result_type nf, double xmin, double xmax, Func fw);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 insert a series of new paragraphs as part of the
new member description::
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Func&gt;
discrete_distribution(result_type nf, double xmin, double xmax, Func fw);
</pre>

<p>
<i>Complexity:</i> Exactly nf invocations of fw.
</p>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
fw shall be callable with one argument of type double, and shall
return values of a type convertible to double;</li>

<li>If nf &gt; 0, the relation <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>min</i></sub></tt> &lt; <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>max</i></sub></tt> shall hold, and for all sample values
<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>, fw(<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>) shall return a weight value <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> that is non-negative, non-NaN,
and non-infinity;</li>

<li>The following relations shall hold: nf &#8805; 0, and 0 &lt; S = <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>0</i></sub></tt>+. . .+<tt><i>w<sub>n-1</sub></i></tt>.</li>

</ol>

<p>
<i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>If nf == 0, sets n = 1 and lets the sequence w have length n = 1 and
   consist of the single value <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>0</i></sub></tt> = 1.</li>

<li>
<p>Otherwise, sets n = nf, deltax = (<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>max</i></sub></tt> - <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>min</i></sub></tt>)/n and <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>cent</i></sub></tt> = <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>min</i></sub></tt> +
0.5 * deltax.</p>
<blockquote><pre>For each k = 0, . . . ,n-1, calculates:
  <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> = <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>cent</i></sub></tt> + k * deltax
  <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> = fw(<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>)
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>Constructs a discrete_distribution object with probabilities:</p>
<blockquote><pre><tt><i>p</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> = <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>/S  for k = 0, . . . , n-1.
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

<p><b>Concept version of the proposed resolution</b></p>


<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete]/1, class <tt>discrete_distribution</tt>, just
<em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit discrete_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
insert:
</p>


<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Callable&lt;auto, double&gt; Func&gt;
 requires Convertible&lt;Func::result_type, double&gt;
discrete_distribution(result_type nf, double xmin, double xmax, Func fw);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 insert a series of new paragraphs as part of the
new member description::
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Callable&lt;auto, double&gt; Func&gt;
 requires Convertible&lt;Func::result_type, double&gt;
discrete_distribution(result_type nf, double xmin, double xmax, Func fw);
</pre>

<p>
<i>Complexity:</i> Exactly nf invocations of fw.
</p>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>If nf &gt; 0, the relation <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>min</i></sub></tt> &lt; <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>max</i></sub></tt> shall hold, and for all sample values
<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>, fw(<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>) shall return a weight value <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> that is non-negative, non-NaN,
and non-infinity;</li>

<li>The following relations shall hold: nf &#8805; 0, and 0 &lt; S = <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>0</i></sub></tt>+. . .+<tt><i>w<sub>n-1</sub></i></tt>.</li>

</ol>

<p>
<i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>If nf == 0, sets n = 1 and lets the sequence w have length n = 1 and
   consist of the single value <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>0</i></sub></tt> = 1.</li>

<li>
<p>Otherwise, sets n = nf, deltax = (<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>max</i></sub></tt> - <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>min</i></sub></tt>)/n and <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>cent</i></sub></tt> = <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>min</i></sub></tt> +
0.5 * deltax.</p>
<blockquote><pre>For each k = 0, . . . ,n-1, calculates:
  <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> = <tt><i>x</i><sub><i>cent</i></sub></tt> + k * deltax
  <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> = fw(<tt><i>x</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>)
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>Constructs a discrete_distribution object with probabilities:</p>
<blockquote><pre><tt><i>p</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt> = <tt><i>w</i><sub><i>k</i></sub></tt>/S  for k = 0, . . . , n-1.
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="794"></a>794. <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> missing constructor</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> should have a constructor like:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class _Fn&gt;
   piecewise_constant_distribution(size_t _Count,
            _Ty _Low, _Ty _High, _Fn&amp; _Func);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
(Makes it easier to fill a histogram with function values over a range.
The two (reference <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#793">793</a>) make a sensible replacement for
<tt>general_pdf_distribution</tt>.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Marc: uses variable width of bins and weight for each bin. This is not
giving enough flexibility to control both variables.
</p>
<p>
Add a library issue to provide an constructor taking an
<tt>initializer_list&lt;double&gt;</tt> and <tt>_Fn</tt> for <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>.
</p>
<p>
Daniel to draft wording.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Pre San Francisco, Daniel provided wording.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The here proposed changes of the WP refer to the current state of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2691.pdf">N2691</a>.
For reasons explained in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#793">793</a>, the author decided to propose a function
argument that is provided by value. The issue proposes a c'tor signature,
that does not take advantage of the full flexibility of
<tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>,
because it restricts on a constant bin width, but the use-case seems to
be popular enough to justify it's introduction.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p><b>Non-concept version of the proposed resolution</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]/1, class <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>,
just <em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit piecewise_constant_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
insert:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Func&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(size_t nf, RealType xmin, RealType xmax, Func fw);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 insert a new sequence of paragraphs nominated
below as [p5_1], [p5_2],
[p5_3], and [p5_4] as part of the new member description:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Func&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(size_t nf, RealType xmin, RealType xmax, Func fw);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
[p5_1] <i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt>nf</tt> invocations of <tt>fw</tt>.
</p>
<p>
[p5_2] <i>Requires:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li><tt>fw</tt> shall be callable with one argument of type <tt>RealType</tt>, and shall
return values of a type convertible to double;
</li>
<li>
For all sample values <tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt> defined below, fw(<tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt>) shall return a weight
value <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt> that is non-negative, non-NaN, and non-infinity;
</li>
<li>
The following relations shall hold: <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> &lt; <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt>, and
0 &lt; S = <tt><i>w<sub>0</sub></i></tt>+. . .+<tt><i>w<sub>n-1</sub></i></tt>.
</li>
</ol>
<p>
[p5_3] <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
<p>If nf == 0,</p>
 <ol type="a">
 <li>
sets deltax = <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt> - <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt>, and</li>
<li> lets the sequence <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n = 1</tt> and consist of the single
    value <tt><i>w<sub>0</sub></i></tt> = 1, and</li>
<li> lets the sequence <tt>b</tt> have length <tt>n+1</tt> with <tt><i>b<sub>0</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> and 
              <tt><i>b<sub>1</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt>
</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p>Otherwise,</p>
<ol type="a">
<li> sets <tt>n = nf</tt>, <tt>deltax = </tt>(<tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt> - <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt>)/n,
                 <tt><i>x<sub>cent</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> + 0.5 * deltax, and
</li>
<li><p>lets the sequences <tt>w</tt> and <tt>b</tt> have length <tt>n</tt> and <tt>n+1</tt>, resp. and</p>
<blockquote><pre>for each k = 0, . . . ,n-1, calculates:
  <tt><i>dx<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = k * deltax
  <tt><i>b<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> + <tt><i>dx<sub>k</sub></i></tt>
  <tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>cent</sub></i></tt> + <tt><i>dx<sub>k</sub></i></tt>
  <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = fw(<tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt>),
</pre></blockquote> 
<p> and</p>
</li>
<li> sets <tt><i>b<sub>n</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Constructs a <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> object with
the above computed sequence <tt>b</tt> as the interval boundaries
and with the probability densities:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><tt><i>&#961;<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt>/(S * deltax)  for k = 0, . . . , n-1.
</pre></blockquote> 
</li>
</ol>
<p>
[p5_4] [<i>Note:</i> In this context, the subintervals [<tt><i>b<sub>k</sub></i></tt>, <tt><i>b<sub>k+1</sub></i></tt>) are commonly
 known as the <i>bins</i> of a histogram. <i>-- end note</i>]
 </p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

<p><b>Concept version of the proposed resolution</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]/1, class <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>,
just <em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit piecewise_constant_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
insert:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Callable&lt;auto, RealType&gt; Func&gt;
 requires Convertible&lt;Func::result_type, double&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(size_t nf, RealType xmin, RealType xmax, Func fw);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 insert a new sequence of paragraphs nominated
below as [p5_1], [p5_2],
[p5_3], and [p5_4] as part of the new member description:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Callable&lt;auto, RealType&gt; Func&gt;
 requires Convertible&lt;Func::result_type, double&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(size_t nf, RealType xmin, RealType xmax, Func fw);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
[p5_1] <i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt>nf</tt> invocations of <tt>fw</tt>.
</p>
<p>
[p5_2] <i>Requires:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
For all sample values <tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt> defined below, fw(<tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt>) shall return a weight
value <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt> that is non-negative, non-NaN, and non-infinity;
</li>
<li>
The following relations shall hold: <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> &lt; <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt>, and
0 &lt; S = <tt><i>w<sub>0</sub></i></tt>+. . .+<tt><i>w<sub>n-1</sub></i></tt>.
</li>
</ol>
<p>
[p5_3] <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
<p>If nf == 0,</p>
 <ol type="a">
 <li>
sets deltax = <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt> - <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt>, and</li>
<li> lets the sequence <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n = 1</tt> and consist of the single
    value <tt><i>w<sub>0</sub></i></tt> = 1, and</li>
<li> lets the sequence <tt>b</tt> have length <tt>n+1</tt> with <tt><i>b<sub>0</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> and 
              <tt><i>b<sub>1</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt>
</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p>Otherwise,</p>
<ol type="a">
<li> sets <tt>n = nf</tt>, <tt>deltax = </tt>(<tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt> - <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt>)/n,
                 <tt><i>x<sub>cent</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> + 0.5 * deltax, and
</li>
<li><p>lets the sequences <tt>w</tt> and <tt>b</tt> have length <tt>n</tt> and <tt>n+1</tt>, resp. and</p>
<blockquote><pre>for each k = 0, . . . ,n-1, calculates:
  <tt><i>dx<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = k * deltax
  <tt><i>b<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>min</sub></i></tt> + <tt><i>dx<sub>k</sub></i></tt>
  <tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>cent</sub></i></tt> + <tt><i>dx<sub>k</sub></i></tt>
  <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = fw(<tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt>),
</pre></blockquote> 
<p> and</p>
</li>
<li> sets <tt><i>b<sub>n</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>x<sub>max</sub></i></tt></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Constructs a <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> object with
the above computed sequence <tt>b</tt> as the interval boundaries
and with the probability densities:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><tt><i>&#961;<sub>k</sub></i></tt> = <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt>/(S * deltax)  for k = 0, . . . , n-1.
</pre></blockquote> 
</li>
</ol>
<p>
[p5_4] [<i>Note:</i> In this context, the subintervals [<tt><i>b<sub>k</sub></i></tt>, <tt><i>b<sub>k+1</sub></i></tt>) are commonly
 known as the <i>bins</i> of a histogram. <i>-- end note</i>]
 </p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="795"></a>795. <tt>general_pdf_distribution</tt> should be dropped</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [rand.dist.samp.genpdf] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</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.genpdf">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.genpdf].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#732">732</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>general_pdf_distribution</tt> should be dropped. (It's a research topic in
adaptive numerical integration.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Stephan Tolksdorf notes:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This appears to be a duplicate of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#732">732</a>.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="796"></a>796. <tt>ranlux48_base</tt> returns wrong value</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.5 [rand.predef] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The 10,000<sup>th</sup> value returned by <tt>ranlux48_base</tt> is supposed to be
61839128582725. We get 192113843633948. (Note that the underlying
generator was changed in Kona.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Submitter withdraws defect.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.5.5 [rand.predef]/p5:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>typedef subtract_with_carry_engine&lt;uint_fast64_t, 48, 5, 12&gt; 
        ranlux48_base; 
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Required behavior:</i> The 10000<sup>th</sup> consecutive invocation of a default-constructed
object of type <tt>ranlux48_base</tt> shall produce the value
<del>61839128582725</del> <ins>192113843633948</ins>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="797"></a>797. <tt>ranlux48</tt> returns wrong value</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.5 [rand.predef] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The 10,000<sup>th</sup> value returned by <tt>ranlux48</tt> is supposed to be
249142670248501. We get 88229545517833. (Note that this depends
on <tt>ranlux48_base</tt>.)
</p>
<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Submitter withdraws defect.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.5.5 [rand.predef]/p6:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>typedef discard_block_engine&lt;ranlux48_base, 389, 11&gt; 
        ranlux48
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Required behavior:</i> The 10000<sup>th</sup> consecutive invocation of a default-constructed
object of type <tt>ranlux48</tt> shall produce the value
<del>249142670248501</del> <ins>88229545517833</ins>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="799"></a>799. [tr.rand.eng.mers] and [rand.eng.mers]</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers], TR1 5.1.4.2 [tr.rand.eng.mers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan Tolksdorf <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-18 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
TR1 5.1.4.2 [tr.rand.eng.mers](10) requires that <tt>operator==</tt> for the <tt>mersenne_twister</tt>
returns <tt>true</tt> if and only if the states of two <tt>mersenne_twisters</tt>,
consisting each of <tt>n</tt> integers between <tt>0</tt> and <tt>2<sup>w</sup> - 1</tt>, are completely
equal. This is a contradiction with TR1 5.1.1 [tr.rand.req](3) because the given
definition of the state also includes the lower <tt>r</tt> bits of <tt>x(i-n)</tt>, which
will never be used to generate a random number. If two <tt>mersenne_twister</tt>s
only differ in the lower bits of <tt>x(i-n)</tt> they will not compare equal,
although they will produce an identical sequence of random numbers.
</p>

<p>
26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers] in the latest C++ draft does not specify the behaviour
of <tt>operator==</tt> but uses a similar definition of the state and, just like
TR1 5.1.4.2 [tr.rand.eng.mers], requires the textual representation of a
<tt>mersenne_twister_engine</tt> to consist of <tt>X<sub>i-n</sub></tt> to <tt>X<sub>i-1</sub></tt>, including the
lower bits of <tt>X<sub>i-n</sub></tt>. This leads to two problems: First, the
unsuspecting implementer is likely to erroneously compare the lower <tt>r</tt>
bits of <tt>X<sub>i-n</sub></tt> in <tt>operator==</tt>. Second, if only the lower <tt>r</tt> bits differ,
two <tt>mersenne_twister_engine</tt>s will compare equal (if correctly
implemented) but have different textual representations, which
conceptually is a bit ugly.
</p>

<p>
I propose that a paragraph or footnote is added to 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers] which
clarifies that the lower <tt>r</tt> bits of <tt>X<sub>i-n</sub></tt> are not to be compared in
<tt>operator==</tt> and <tt>operator!=</tt>. It would only be consequent if furthermore
the specification for the textual respresentation was changed to
<tt>X<sub>i-n</sub> bitand ((2<sup>w</sup> - 1) - (2<sup>r</sup> - 1)), X<sub>i-(n-1)</sub>, ...,  X<sub>i-1</sub></tt> or
something similar.
</p>

<p>
These changes would likely have no practical effect, but would allow an
implementation that does the right thing to be standard-conformant.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Fermi Lab has no objection to the proposed change. However it feels that
more time is needed to check the details, which would suggest a change
to REVIEW.
</p>
<p>
Bill feels that this is NAD, not enough practical importance to abandon
the simple definition of equality, and someone would have to do a lot
more study to ensure that all cases are covered for a very small
payback. The submitter admits that "These changes would likely have no
practical effect,", and according to Plum's razor this means that it is
not worth the effort!
</p>
<p>
Revisted: Agree that the fact that there is no practical difference means that no change can be justified.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 26.5.3.2 [rand.eng.mers]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Insert at the end of para 2.:
</p>

<blockquote>
[<i>Note:</i> The lower <tt>r</tt> bits of <tt>X<sub>i-n</sub></tt> do not influence
the state transition and hence should not be compared when comparing two
<tt>mersenne_twister_engine</tt> objects. <i>-- end note</i>]
</blockquote>

<p>
In para 5. change:
</p>

<blockquote>
The textual representation of <tt>x<sub>i</sub></tt> consists of the values of
<tt>X<sub>i-n</sub> <ins>bitand ((2<sup>w</sup> - 1) - (2<sup>r</sup> - 1)),  X<sub>i-(n-1)</sub></ins>,
..., X<sub>i-1</sub></tt>, in that order.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="800"></a>800. Issues in 26.4.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq](6)</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan Tolksdorf <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-18 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The for-loop in the algorithm specification has <tt>n</tt> iterations, where <tt>n</tt> is
defined to be <tt>end - begin</tt>, i.e. the number of supplied w-bit quantities.
Previous versions of this algorithm and the general logic behind it
suggest that this is an oversight and that in the context of the
for-loop <tt>n</tt> should be the number of full 32-bit quantities in <tt>b</tt> (rounded
upwards). If <tt>w</tt> is 64, the current algorithm throws away half of all bits
in <tt>b</tt>. If <tt>w</tt> is 16, the current algorithm sets half of all elements in <tt>v</tt>
to 0.
</p>

<p>
There are two more minor issues:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
Strictly speaking <tt>end - begin</tt> is not defined since
<tt>InputIterator</tt> is not required to be a random access iterator.
</li>
<li>
Currently all integral types are allowed as input to the <tt>seed_seq</tt>
constructor, including <tt>bool</tt>. IMHO allowing <tt>bool</tt>s unnecessarily
complicates the implementation without any real benefit to the user.
I'd suggest to exclude <tt>bool</tt>s as input.
</li>
</ul>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to OPEN Bill will try to propose a resolution by the next meeting.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
post Bellevue:  Bill provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p>
This issue is made moot if <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#803">803</a> is accepted.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Replace 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] paragraph 6 with:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>seed_seq</tt> object by effectively concatenating the
low-order <tt>u</tt> bits of each of the elements of the supplied sequence <tt>[begin,
end)</tt>
in ascending order of significance to make a (possibly very large) unsigned
binary number <tt>b</tt> having a total of <tt>n</tt> bits, and then carrying out the
following
algorithm:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>for( v.clear(); n &gt; 0; n -= 32 )
   v.push_back(b mod 2<sup>32</sup>), b /= 2<sup>32</sup>;
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="802"></a>802. <tt>knuth_b</tt> returns wrong value</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.5 [rand.predef] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> P.J. Plauger <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-20 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The 10,000<sup>th</sup> value returned by <tt>knuth_b</tt> is supposed to be
1112339016. We get 2126698284.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.5.5 [rand.predef]/p8:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>typedef shuffle_order_engine&lt;minstd_rand0, 256&gt; 
        knuth_b; 
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Required behavior:</i> The 10000<sup>th</sup> consecutive invocation of a default-constructed
object of type <tt>knuth_b</tt> shall produce the value
<del>1112339016</del> <ins>2126698284</ins>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
Bellevue: Submitter withdraws defect. "We got the wrong value for entirely the right reasons". NAD.
]</i></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="803"></a>803. Simplification of <tt>seed_seq::seq_seq</tt></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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Charles Karney <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-22 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end);</tt> constructs a <tt>seed_seq</tt>
object repacking the bits of supplied sequence <tt>[begin, end)</tt> into a
32-bit vector.
</p>
<p>
This repacking triggers several problems:
</p>
<ol>
<li>
Distinctness of the output of <tt>seed_seq::generate</tt> required the
introduction of the initial "<tt>if (w &lt; 32) v.push_back(n);</tt>"  (Otherwise
the unsigned short vectors [1, 0] and [1] generate the same sequence.)
</li>
<li>
Portability demanded the introduction of the template parameter <tt>u</tt>.
(Otherwise some sequences could not be obtained on computers where no
integer types are exactly 32-bits wide.)
</li>
<li>
The description and algorithm have become unduly complicated.
</li>
</ol>
<p>
I propose simplifying this <tt>seed_seq</tt> constructor to be "32-bit only".
Despite it's being simpler, there is NO loss of functionality (see
below).
</p>
<p>
Here's how the description would read
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] Class <tt>seed_seq</tt>
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class InputIterator&gt;
  seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
5 <i>Requires:</i> NO CHANGE
</p>
<p>
6 <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>seed_seq</tt> object by
</p>
<blockquote>
<pre>for (InputIterator s = begin; s != end; ++s)
   v.push_back((*s) mod 2^32);
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Discussion:
</p>
<p>
The chief virtues here are simplicity, portability, and generality.
</p>
<ul>
<li>
Simplicity -- compare the above specification with the
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">n2461</a> proposal.
</li>
<li>
Portability -- with <tt>iterator_traits&lt;InputIterator&gt;::value_type =
uint_least32_t</tt> the user is guaranteed to get the same behavior across
platforms.
</li>
<li>
Generality -- any behavior that the
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">n2461</a>
proposal can achieve can be
obtained with this simpler proposal (albeit with a shuffling of bits
in the input sequence).
</li>
</ul>
<p>
Arguments (and counter-arguments) against making this change (and
retaining the
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">n2461</a>
behavior) are:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
<p>
The user can pass an array of <tt>unsigned char</tt> and <tt>seed_seq</tt> will nicely
 repack it.
</p>
<p>
 Response: So what?  Consider the seed string "ABC".  The
 <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">n2461</a>
 proposal results in
</p>
<blockquote><pre>v = { 0x3, 0x434241 };
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
while the simplified proposal yields
</p>
<blockquote><pre>v = { 0x41, 0x42, 0x43 };
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
The results produced by <tt>seed_seq::generate</tt> with the two inputs are
different but nevertheless equivalently "mixed up" and this remains
true even if the seed string is long.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
With long strings (e.g., with bit-length comparable to the number of
 bits in the state), <tt>v</tt> is longer (by a factor of 4) with the simplified
 proposal and <tt>seed_seq::generate</tt> will be slower.
</p>
<p>
Response: It's unlikely that the efficiency of <tt>seed_seq::generate</tt> will
 be a big issue.  If it is, the user is free to repack the seed vector
 before constructing <tt>seed_seq</tt>.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
A user can pass an array of 64-bit integers and all the bits will be
 used.
</p>
<p>
 Response: Indeed.  However, there are many instances in the 
 <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">n2461</a>
 where integers are silently coerced to a narrower width and this
 should just be a case of the user needing to read the documentation.
 The user can of course get equivalent behavior by repacking his seed
 into 32-bit pieces.  Furthermore, the unportability of the 
 <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2461.pdf">n2461</a>
 proposal with
</p>
<blockquote><pre>unsigned long s[] = {1, 2, 3, 4};
seed_seq q(s, s+4);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
 which typically results in <tt>v = {1, 2, 3, 4}</tt> on 32-bit machines and in
<tt>v = {1, 0, 2, 0, 3, 0, 4, 0}</tt> on 64-bit machines is a major pitfall for
 unsuspecting users.
</p>
</li>
</ul>

<p>
Note: this proposal renders moot issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#782">782</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#800">800</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Bellevue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Walter needs to ask Fermilab for guidance. Defer till tomorrow. Bill likes the proposed resolution.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Marc Paterno wants portable behavior between 32bit and 64bit machines;
we've gone to significant trouble to support portability of engines and
their values.
</p>
<p>
Jens: the new algorithm looks perfectly portable
</p>
<p>
Marc Paterno to review off-line.
</p>
<p>
Modify the proposed resolution to read "Constructs a seed_seq object by the following algorithm ..."
</p>
<p>
Disposition: move to review; unanimous consent.
</p>
<p>
(moots <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#782">782</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#800">800</a>)
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template&lt;class InputIterator<del>, 
  size_t u = numeric_limits&lt;iterator_traits&lt;InputIterator&gt;::value_type&gt;::digits</del>&gt;
  seed_seq(InputIterator begin, InputIterator end);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-5- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>InputIterator</tt> shall satisfy the requirements of an input iterator (24.1.1)
such that <tt>iterator_traits&lt;InputIterator&gt;::value_type</tt> shall denote an integral type.
</p>
<p>
-6- Constructs a <tt>seed_seq</tt> object by <ins>the following algorithm</ins> <del>rearranging some or all of the bits of the supplied sequence
<tt>[begin,end)</tt> of w-bit quantities into 32-bit units, as if by the following: </del>
</p>
<p>
<del>First extract the rightmost <tt>u</tt> bits from each of the <tt>n = end
- begin</tt> elements of the supplied sequence and concatenate all the
extracted bits to initialize a single (possibly very large) unsigned
binary number, <tt>b = &#8721;<sup>n-1</sup><sub>i=0</sub> (begin[i] 
mod 2<sup>u</sup>) � 2<sup>w�i</sup></tt> (in which the bits of each <tt>begin[i]</tt>
are treated as denoting an unsigned quantity). Then carry out 
the following algorithm:</del>
</p>
<blockquote><pre><del>
v.clear(); 
if ($w$ &lt; 32) 
  v.push_back($n$); 
for( ; $n$ &gt; 0; --$n$) 
  v.push_back(b mod 2<sup>32</sup>), b /= 2<sup>32</sup>;
</del></pre></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<pre><ins>
for (InputIterator s = begin; s != end; ++s)
   v.push_back((*s) mod 2<sup>32</sup>);
</ins></pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="812"></a>812. unsolicited multithreading considered harmful?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.1 [alg.sort] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Paul McKenney <b>Opened:</b> 2008-02-27 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Multi-threading is a good thing, but unsolicited multi-threading can
potentially be harmful.  For example, <tt>sort()</tt> performance might be
greatly increased via a multithreaded implementation.  However, such
a multithreaded implementation could result in concurrent invocations
of the user-supplied comparator.  This would in turn result in problems
given a caching comparator that might be written for complex sort keys.
Please note that this is not a theoretical issue, as multithreaded
implementations of <tt>sort()</tt> already exist.
</p>
<p>
Having a multithreaded <tt>sort()</tt> available is good, but it should not
be the default for programs that are not explicitly multithreaded.
Users should not be forced to deal with concurrency unless they have
asked for it.
</p>

<p><i>[
This may be covered by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2410.html">N2410</a>
Thread-Safety in the Standard Library (Rev 1).
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
This is already covered by 17.6.5.6/20 in N2723.





<hr>
<h3><a name="822"></a>822. Object with explicit copy constructor no longer <tt>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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> James Kanze <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-01 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I just noticed that the following program is legal in C++03, but
is forbidden in the current draft:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;vector&gt;
#include &lt;iostream&gt;

class Toto
{
public:
    Toto() {}
    explicit Toto( Toto const&amp; ) {}
} ;

int
main()
{
    std::vector&lt; Toto &gt; v( 10 ) ;
    return 0 ;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Is this change intentional?  (And if so, what is the
justification?  I wouldn't call such code good, but I don't see
any reason to break it unless we get something else in return.)
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The subgroup that looked at this felt this was a good change, but it may
already be handled by incoming concepts (we're not sure).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair: Proposed resolution kinda funky as these tables no longer
exist. Move from direct init to copy init. Clarify with Doug, recommends
NAD.
</p>
<p>
Walter: Suggest NAD via introduction of concepts.
</p>
<p>
Recommend close as NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Need to look at again without concepts.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Move to Ready with original proposed resolution.
</p>
<p><i>[Howard:  Original proposed resolution restored.]</i></p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-11 Batavia:
]</i></p>

<p>
This issue was re-reviewed in relation to [another issue, number to follow],
and the verdict was reversed.  Explicit copy and move constructors are rare
beasts, and the ripple effect of this fix was far more difficult to contain
than simply saying such types do not satisfy the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>
and <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements.
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
In 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] change Table 33: <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> requirements [moveconstructible]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<th>expression</th><th>post-condition</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>T t<ins>(rv)</ins><del> = rv</del></tt></td><td><tt>t</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the construction</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center">...</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
In 20.2.1 [utility.arg.requirements] change Table 34: <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements [copyconstructible]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<th>expression</th><th>post-condition</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>T t<ins>(u)</ins><del> = u</del></tt></td><td>the value of <tt>u</tt> is unchanged and is equivalent to <tt>t</tt></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center">...</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3215.html">n3215</a>.





<hr>
<h3><a name="825"></a>825. Missing rvalues reference stream insert/extract operators?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview], 20.9.10.2.8 [util.smartptr.shared.io], 22.4.8 [facets.examples], 20.5.4 [bitset.operators], 26.4.6 [complex.ops], 27.6 [stream.buffers], 28.9 [re.submatch] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-10 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 220</b></p>

<p>
Should the following use rvalues references to stream in insert/extract
operators?
</p>

<ul>
<li>19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview]</li>
<li>20.9.10.2.8 [util.smartptr.shared.io]</li>
<li>22.4.8 [facets.examples]</li>
<li>20.5.4 [bitset.operators]</li>
<li>26.4.6 [complex.ops]</li>
<li>Doubled signatures in 27.6 [stream.buffers] for character inserters
(ref 27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character])
+ definition 27.7.2.6.4 [ostream.inserters.character]</li>
<li>28.9 [re.submatch]</li>
</ul>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree with the idea in the issue, Alisdair to provide wording.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Daniel adds 2009-02-14:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposal given in the paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2831.html">N2831</a>
apparently resolves this issue.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The cited paper is an earlier version of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a>,
which changed the rvalue reference binding rules.
That paper includes generic templates
<tt>operator&lt;&lt;</tt> and <tt>operator&gt;&gt;</tt>
that adapt rvalue streams.
</p>
<p>
We therefore agree with Daniel's observation.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="826"></a>826. Equivalent of <tt>%'d</tt>, or rather, lack thereof?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22.4.2.2 [locale.nm.put] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-07 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In the spirit of <tt>printf vs iostream</tt>...
</p>

<p>
POSIX <tt>printf</tt> says that <tt>%'d</tt> should insert grouping characters (and the
implication is that in the absence of <tt>'</tt> no grouping characters are
inserted). The <tt>num_put</tt> facet, on the other hand, seems to always insert
grouping characters. Can this be considered a defect worth fixing for
C++0x? Maybe <tt>ios_base</tt> needs an additional flag?
</p>

<p><i>[
Pablo Halpern:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I'm not sure it constitutes a defect, but I would be in favor of adding
another flag (and corresponding manipulator).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Martin Sebor:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I don't know if it qualifies as a defect but I agree that there
should be an easy way to control whether the thousands separator
should or shouldn't be inserted. A new flag would be in line with
the current design of iostreams (like <tt>boolalpha</tt>, <tt>showpos</tt>, or
<tt>showbase</tt>).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This is not a part of C99. LWG suggests submitting a paper may be appropriate.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="828"></a>828. Static initialization for <tt>std::mutex</tt>?</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Peter Dimov <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-18 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
[Note: I'm assuming here that 3.6.2 [basic.start.init]/1 will be fixed.]
</p>
<p>
Currently <tt>std::mutex</tt> doesn't support static initialization. This is a
regression with respect to <tt>pthread_mutex_t</tt>, which does. I believe that
we should strive to eliminate such regressions in expressive power where
possible, both to ease migration and to not provide incentives to (or
force) people to forego the C++ primitives in favor of pthreads.
</p>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We believe this is implementable on POSIX, because the initializer-list
feature and the constexpr feature make this work. Double-check core
language about static initialization for this case. Ask core for a core
issue about order of destruction of statically-initialized objects wrt.
dynamically-initialized objects (should come afterwards). Check
non-POSIX systems for implementability.
</p>
<p>
If ubiquitous implementability cannot be assured, plan B is to introduce
another constructor, make this constexpr, which is
conditionally-supported. To avoid ambiguities, this new constructor needs
to have an additional parameter.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Jens: constant initialization seems to be ok core-language wise
</p>
<p>
Consensus: Defer to threading experts, in particular a Microsoft platform expert.
</p>
<p>
Lawrence to send e-mail to Herb Sutter, Jonathan Caves, Anthony Wiliams,
Paul McKenney, Martin Tasker, Hans Boehm, Bill Plauger, Pete Becker,
Peter Dimov to alert them of this issue.
</p>
<p>
Lawrence: What about header file shared with C? The initialization
syntax is different in C and C++.
</p>
<p>
Recommend Keep in Review
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Keep in Review status pending feedback from members of the Concurrency subgroup.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
See related comments from Alisdiar and Daniel in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#827">827</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  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 30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class mutex {
public:
  <ins>constexpr</ins> mutex();
  ...
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="830"></a>830. Incomplete list of char_traits specializations</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21.2 [char.traits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-23 <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#char.traits">issues</a> in [char.traits].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
  Paragraph 4 of 21.2 [char.traits] mentions that this
  section specifies two specializations (<code>char_traits&lt;char&gt;</code>
  and (<code>char_traits&lt;wchar_t&gt;</code>). However, there are actually
  four specializations provided, i.e. in addition to the two above also
  <code>char_traits&lt;char16_t&gt;</code> and <code>char_traits&lt;char32_t&gt;</code>).
  I guess this was just an oversight and there is nothing wrong with just
  fixing this.
</p>

<p><i>[
Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<tt>char_traits&lt; char16/32_t &gt;</tt>
should also be added to <tt>&lt;ios_fwd&gt;</tt> in 27.3 [iostream.forward], and all the specializations
taking a <tt>char_traits</tt> parameter in that header.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Idea of the issue is ok.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair to provide wording, once that wording arrives, move to review.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-04 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The main point of the issue was resolved editorially in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>,
so we are
close to NAD Editorial.
However, exploring the issue we found a second tweak was necessary for
<tt>&lt;iosfwd&gt;</tt> and that is still outstanding, so here are the words I am long
overdue delivering:
</p>

<p><i>[
Howard:  I've put Alisdair's words into the proposed wording section and
moved the issue to Review.
]</i></p>


</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Original proposed wording.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>

<p>
  Replace paragraph 4 of 21.2 [char.traits] by:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
  This subclause specifies a struct template, <code>char_traits&lt;charT&gt;</code>,
  and four explicit specializations of it, <code>char_traits&lt;char&gt;</code>,
  <code>char_traits&lt;char16_t&gt;</code>, <code>char_traits&lt;char32_t&gt;</code>, and
  <code>char_traits&lt;wchar_t&gt;</code>, all of which appear in the header
  &lt;string&gt; and satisfy the requirements below.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree.  Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change Forward declarations 27.3 [iostream.forward]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<b>Header <tt>&lt;iosfwd&gt;</tt> synopsis</b>
</p>
<pre>namespace std {
   template&lt;class charT&gt; class char_traits;
   template&lt;&gt; class char_traits&lt;char&gt;;
   <ins>template&lt;&gt; class char_traits&lt;char16_t&gt;;</ins>
   <ins>template&lt;&gt; class char_traits&lt;char32_t&gt;;</ins>
   template&lt;&gt; class char_traits&lt;wchar_t&gt;;
...
}
</pre>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="831"></a>831. wrong type for not_eof()</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dietmar K�hl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-04-23 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
  In Table 56 (Traits requirements) the <tt>not_eof()</tt> member function
  is using an argument of type <i>e</i> which denotes an object of
  type <code>X::int_type</code>. However, the specializations in
  21.2.3 [char.traits.specializations] all use <code>char_type</code>.
  This would effectively mean that the argument type actually can't
  represent EOF in the first place. I'm pretty sure that the type used
  to be <code>int_type</code> which is quite obviously the only sensible
  argument.
</p>
<p>
  This issue is close to being editorial. I suspect that the proposal
  changing this section to include the specializations for <code>char16_t</code>
  and <code>char32_t</code> accidentally used the wrong type.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
  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
   [char.traits.specializations.wchar_t] correct the
  argument type from <code>char_type</code> to <code>int_type</code>.
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Already fixed in WP.





<hr>
<h3><a name="832"></a>832. Applying constexpr to System error support</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-14 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Initialization of objects of class <tt>error_code</tt>
(19.5.2 [syserr.errcode]) and class
<tt>error_condition</tt> (19.5.3 [syserr.errcondition]) can be made simpler and more reliable by use of
the new <tt>constexpr</tt> feature 
[<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2349.pdf">N2349</a>]
of C++0x. Less code will need to be
generated for both library implementations and user programs when
manipulating constant objects of these types. 
</p>

<p>
This was not proposed originally because the constant expressions
proposal was moving into the standard at about the same time as the
Diagnostics Enhancements proposal 
[<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2241.html">N2241</a>],
and it wasn't desirable to
make the later depend on the former. There were also technical concerns
as to how <tt>constexpr</tt> would apply to references. Those concerns are now
resolved; <tt>constexpr</tt> can't be used for references, and that fact is
reflected in the proposed resolution.
</p>

<p>
Thanks to Jens Maurer, Gabriel Dos Reis, and Bjarne Stroustrup for clarification of <tt>constexpr</tt> requirements.
</p>

<p>
LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#804">804</a> is related in that it raises the question of whether the
exposition only member <tt>cat_</tt> of class <tt>error_code</tt> (19.5.2 [syserr.errcode]) and class
<tt>error_condition</tt> (19.5.3 [syserr.errcondition]) should be presented as a reference or pointer.
While in the context of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#804">804</a> that is arguably an editorial question,
presenting it as a pointer becomes more or less required with this
proposal, given <tt>constexpr</tt> does not play well with references. The
proposed resolution thus changes the private member to a pointer, which
also brings it in sync with real implementations.
</p>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
On going question of extern pointer vs. inline functions for interface.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Pre-San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Beman Dawes reports that this proposal is unimplementable, and thus NAD.
</p>
<p>
Implementation would require <tt>constexpr</tt> objects of classes derived
from class <tt>error_category</tt>, which has virtual functions, and that is
not allowed by the core language. This was determined when trying to
implement the proposal using a constexpr enabled compiler provided
by Gabriel Dos Reis, and subsequently verified in discussions with
Gabriel and Jens Maurer.
</p>

</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
The proposed wording assumes the LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#805">805</a> proposed wording has been
applied to the WP, resulting in the former <tt>posix_category</tt> being renamed
<tt>generic_category</tt>. If <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#805">805</a> has not been applied, the names in this
proposal must be adjusted accordingly.
</p>

<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><del>const error_category&amp; get_generic_category();</del>
<del>const error_category&amp; get_system_category();</del>

<del>static</del> <ins>extern</ins> const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>* const</ins> generic_category<del> = get_generic_category()</del>;
<del>static</del> <ins>extern</ins> const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>* const</ins> <del>native_category</del> system_category<del> = get_system_category()</del>;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.1.5 [syserr.errcat.objects] Error category objects as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre><ins>extern</ins> const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>* const</ins> <del>get_</del>generic_category<del>()</del>;
</pre>
<p>
<del><i>Returns:</i> A reference</del> <ins><tt>generic_category</tt> shall point</ins>
to <del>an</del> <ins>a statically initialized</ins> object of a type derived from
class <tt>error_category</tt>.
</p>

<p>
<del><i>Remarks:</i></del> 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>

<pre><ins>extern</ins> const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>* const</ins> <del>get_</del>system_category<del>()</del>;
</pre>

<p>
<del><i>Returns:</i> A reference</del> <ins><tt>system_category</tt> shall point</ins>
to <del>an</del> <ins>a statically
initialized</ins> object of a type derived from class <tt>error_category</tt>.
</p>

<p>
<del><i>Remarks:</i></del>  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>

<p>
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)</tt>. Otherwise, the
function shall return <tt>error_condition(ev, system_category)</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>]
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview] Class <tt>error_code</tt> overview as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class error_code {
public:
  ...;
  <ins>constexpr</ins> error_code(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
  ...
  void assign(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
  ...
  const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> category() const;
  ...
private:
  int val_;                    // exposition only
  const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat_; // exposition only
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.2.2 [syserr.errcode.constructors] Class <tt>error_code</tt> constructors as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre><ins>constexpr</ins> error_code(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
</pre>
<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_ == cat</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] Class <tt>error_code</tt> modifiers  as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>void assign(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
</pre>
<p>
<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == val</tt> and <tt>cat_ == cat</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.2.4 [syserr.errcode.observers] Class <tt>error_code</tt> observers  as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> category() const;
</pre>

<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>cat_</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.3.1 [syserr.errcondition.overview] Class <tt>error_condition</tt> overview   as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>class error_condition {
public:
  ...;
  <ins>constexpr</ins> error_condition(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
  ...
  void assign(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
  ...
  const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> category() const;
  ...
private:
  int val_;                    // exposition only
  const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat_; // exposition only
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.3.2 [syserr.errcondition.constructors] Class <tt>error_condition</tt> constructors as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre><ins>constexpr</ins> error_condition(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
</pre>
<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_ == cat</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers] Class <tt>error_condition</tt> modifiers as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>void assign(int val, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> cat);
</pre>
<p>
<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>val_ == val</tt> and <tt>cat_ == cat</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.3.4 [syserr.errcondition.observers] Class <tt>error_condition</tt> observers as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> category() const;
</pre>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>cat_</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Throughout 19.5 [syserr] System error support, change "<tt>category().</tt>"  to "<tt>category()-&gt;</tt>".
Appears approximately six times.
</p>

<p>
<i>[Partially Editorial]</i> In 19.5.4 [syserr.compare] Comparison operators,
paragraphs 2 and 4, change "<tt>category.equivalent(</tt>"  to
"<tt>category()-&gt;equivalent(</tt>".
</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&amp; what_arg);
  system_error(error_code ec);
  system_error(int ev, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> ecat,
      const string&amp; what_arg);
  system_error(int ev, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> ecat);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.6.2 [syserr.syserr.members] Class system_error members as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>system_error(int ev, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> ecat, const string&amp; 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.c_str()) == 0</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<pre>system_error(int ev, const error_category<del>&amp;</del><ins>*</ins> ecat);
</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(), "") == 0</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD because Beman said so.
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="833"></a>833. Freestanding implementations header list needs review for C++0x</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-14 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Once the C++0x standard library is feature complete, the LWG needs to
review 17.6.1.3 [compliance] Freestanding implementations header list to
ensure it reflects LWG consensus.
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This is a placeholder defect to remind us to review the table once we've
stopped adding headers to the library.
</p>
<p>
Three new headers that need to be added to the list:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>&lt;initializer_list&gt; &lt;concept&gt; &lt;iterator_concepts&gt;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
<tt>&lt;iterator_concepts&gt;</tt>, in particular, has lots of stuff
that isn't needed, so maybe the stuff that is needed should be broken
out into a separate header.
</p>
<p>
Robert: What about <tt>reference_closure</tt>? It's currently in
<tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<ol>
<li>
The comment regarding <tt>reference_closure</tt> seems moot since it was just
recently decided to remove that.
</li>
<li>
A reference to proposal
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2814.pdf">N2814</a>
("Fixing freestanding") should be added. This
paper e.g. proposes to add only <tt>&lt;initializer_list&gt;</tt> to the include list
of freestanding.
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Addressed by paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2814.pdf">N2814</a>.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="837"></a>837. 
   <code>basic_ios::copyfmt()</code> overly loosely specified
 </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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
   <p>

The <code>basic_ios::copyfmt()</code> member function is specified in 27.5.4.2 [basic.ios.members] to have the following effects:

   </p>
   <blockquote>

<i>Effects</i>: If <code>(this == &amp;rhs)</code> does
nothing. Otherwise assigns to the member objects of <code>*this</code>
the corresponding member objects of <code>rhs</code>, except that

     <ul>
       <li>

<code>rdstate()</code> and <code>rdbuf()</code> are left unchanged;

       </li>
       <li>

<code>exceptions()</code> is altered last by
calling <code>exceptions(rhs.except)</code>

       </li>
       <li>

the contents of arrays pointed at by <code>pword</code>
and <code>iword</code> are copied not the pointers themselves

       </li>
     </ul>
   </blockquote>
   <p>

Since the rest of the text doesn't specify what the member objects
of <code>basic_ios</code> are this seems a little too loose.

</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>

I propose to tighten things up by adding a <i>Postcondition</i> clause
to the function like so:

   </p>
   <blockquote>
     <i>Postconditions:</i>

     <table border="1">
       <thead>
         <tr>
           <th colspan="2"><code>copyfmt()</code> postconditions</th>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <th>Element</th>
           <th>Value</th>
         </tr>
       </thead>
       <tbody>
         <tr>
           <td><code>rdbuf()</code></td>
           <td><i>unchanged</i></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>tie()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.tie()</code></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>rdstate()</code></td>
           <td><i>unchanged</i></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>exceptions()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.exceptions()</code></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>flags()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.flags()</code></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>width()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.width()</code></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>precision()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.precision()</code></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>fill()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.fill()</code></td>
         </tr>
         <tr> 
           <td><code>getloc()</code></td>
           <td><code>rhs.getloc()</code></td>
         </tr>
       </tbody>
     </table>
   </blockquote>
   <p>

The format of the table follows Table 117 (as
of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2588.pdf">N2588</a>): <code>basic_ios::init()</code>
effects.

   </p>
   <p>

The intent of the new table is not to impose any new requirements or
change existing ones, just to be more explicit about what I believe is
already there.

   </p>
 



<hr>
<h3><a name="839"></a>839. Maps and sets missing splice operation</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6 [associative], 23.7 [unord] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alan Talbot <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-18 <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#associative">issues</a> in [associative].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Splice is a very useful feature of <tt>list</tt>. This functionality is also very
useful for any other node based container, and I frequently wish it were
available for maps and sets. It seems like an omission that these
containers lack this capability. Although the complexity for a splice is
the same as for an insert, the actual time can be much less since the
objects need not be reallocated and copied. When the element objects are
heavy and the compare operations are fast (say a <tt>map&lt;int, huge_thingy&gt;</tt>)
this can be a big win.
</p>

<p>
<b>Suggested resolution:</b>
</p>

<p>
Add the following signatures to map, set, multimap, multiset, and the unordered associative containers:
</p>
<blockquote><pre> 
void splice(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x);
void splice(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, const_iterator i);
void splice(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Hint versions of these are also useful to the extent hint is useful.
(I'm looking for guidance about whether hints are in fact useful.)
</p>
 
<blockquote><pre> 
void splice(const_iterator position, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x);
void splice(const_iterator position, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, const_iterator i);
void splice(const_iterator position, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Sophia Antipolis:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Don't try to <tt>splice "list"</tt> into the other containers, it should be container-type.
</p>
<p>
<tt>forward_list</tt> already has <tt>splice_after</tt>.
</p>
<p>
Would "<tt>splice</tt>" make sense for an <tt>unordered_map</tt>?
</p>
<p>
Jens, Robert: "<tt>splice</tt>" is not the right term, it implies maintaining ordering in <tt>list</tt>s.
</p>
<p>
Howard: <tt>adopt</tt>?
</p>
<p>
Jens: <tt>absorb</tt>?
</p>
<p>
Alan: <tt>subsume</tt>?
</p>
<p>
Robert: <tt>recycle</tt>?
</p>
<p>
Howard: <tt>transfer</tt>? (but no direction)
</p>
<p>
Jens: <tt>transfer_from</tt>. No.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair: Can we give a nothrow guarantee? If your <tt>compare()</tt> and <tt>hash()</tt> doesn't throw, yes.
</p>
<p>
Daniel: For <tt>unordered_map</tt>, we can't guarantee nothrow.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Martin: this would possibly outlaw an implementation technique that is
currently in use; caching nodes in containers.
</p>
<p>
Alan: if you cache in the allocator, rather than the individual
container, this proposal doesn't interfere with that.
</p>
<p>
Martin: I'm not opposed to this, but I'd like to see an implementation
that demonstrates that it works.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-09-19 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I'm not disagreeing with the NAD Future resolution.  But when the future gets
here, here is a possibility worth exploring:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Add to the "unique" associative containers:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>typedef <i>details</i>      node_ptr;

node_ptr             remove(const_iterator p);
pair&lt;iterator, bool&gt; insert(node_ptr&amp;&amp; nd);
iterator             insert(const_iterator p, node_ptr&amp;&amp; nd);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
And add to the "multi" associative containers:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>typedef <i>details</i> node_ptr;

node_ptr remove(const_iterator p);
iterator insert(node_ptr&amp;&amp; nd);
iterator insert(const_iterator p, node_ptr&amp;&amp; nd);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
<tt>Container::node_ptr</tt> is a smart pointer much like <tt>unique_ptr</tt>.
It owns a node obtained from the container it was removed from.  It maintains a
reference to the allocator in the container so that it can properly deallocate
the node if asked to, even if the allocator is stateful.  This being said, the
<tt>node_ptr</tt> can not outlive the container for this reason.
</p>

<p>
The <tt>node_ptr</tt> offers "<tt>const</tt>-free" access to the node's
<tt>value_type</tt>.
</p>

<p>
With this interface, clients have a great deal of flexibility:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
A client can remove a node from one container, and insert it into another
(without any heap allocation).  This is the splice functionality this issue
asks for.
</li>
<li>
A client can remove a node from a container, change its key or value, and insert
it back into the same container, or another container, all without the cost of
allocating a node.
</li>
<li>
If the Compare function is nothrow (which is very common), then this functionality
is nothrow unless modifying the value throws.  And if this does throw, it does
so outside of the containers involved.
</li>
<li>
If the Compare function does throw, the <tt>insert</tt> function will have the
argument <tt>nd</tt> retain ownership of the node.
</li>
<li>
The <tt>node_ptr</tt> should be independent of the <tt>Compare</tt> parameter
so that a node can be transferred from <tt>set&lt;T, C1, A&gt;</tt>
to <tt>set&lt;T, C2, A&gt;</tt> (for example).
</li>
</ul>

<p>
Here is how the customer might use this functionality:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
<p>
Splice a node from one container to another:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>m2.insert(m1.remove(i));
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Change the "key" in a <tt>std::map</tt> without the cost of node reallocation:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>auto p = m.remove(i);
p-&gt;first = new_key;
m.insert(std::move(p));
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Change the "value" in a <tt>std::set</tt> without the cost of node reallocation:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>auto p = s.remove(i);
*p = new_value;
s.insert(std::move(p));
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Move a move-only or heavy object out of an associative container (as opposed to
the proposal in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1041">1041</a>):
</p>
<blockquote><pre>MoveOnly x = std::move(*s.remove(i));
</pre></blockquote>
<ol>
<li>
<tt>remove(i)</tt> transfers ownership of the node from the set to a temporary
<tt>node_ptr</tt>.
</li>
<li>
The <tt>node_ptr</tt> is dereferenced, and that non-const reference is sent to
<tt>move</tt> to cast it to an rvalue.
</li>
<li>
The rvalue <tt>MoveOnly</tt> is move constructed into <tt>x</tt> from
the <tt>node_ptr</tt>.
</li>
<li>
<tt>~node_ptr()</tt> destructs the moved-from <tt>MoveOnly</tt> and deallocates
the node.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
Contrast this with the <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1041">1041</a> solution:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>MoveOnly x = std::move(s.extract(i).first);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The former requires one move construction for <tt>x</tt> while the latter
requires two (one into the <tt>pair</tt> and then one into <tt>x</tt>).  Either
of these constructions can throw (say if there is only a copy constructor for
<tt>x</tt>).  With the former, the point of throw is outside of the container
<tt>s</tt>, after the element has been removed from the container.  With the latter,
one throwing construction takes place prior to the removal of the element, and
the second takes place after the element is removed.
</p>

</li>
</ul>

<p>
The "node insertion" API maintains the API associated with inserting <tt>value_type</tt>s
so the customer can use familiar techniques for getting an iterator to the 
inserted node, or finding out whether it was inserted or not for the "unique"
containers.
</p>

<p>
Lightly prototyped.  No implementation problems.  Appears to work great
for the client.
</p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="840"></a>840. <tt>pair</tt> default template argument</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thorsten Ottosen <b>Opened:</b> 2008-05-23 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I have one issue with <tt>std::pair</tt>. Well, it might just be a very annoying
historical accident, but why is there no default template argument for
the second template argument? This is so annoying when the type in
question is looong and hard to write (type deduction with <tt>auto</tt> won't
help those cases where we use it as a return or argument type).
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in 20.3 [utility] to read:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T1, class T2 <ins>= T1</ins>&gt; struct pair;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 20.3.5 [pairs] to read:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
 template &lt;class T1, class T2 <ins>= T1</ins>&gt;
 struct pair {
   typedef T1 first_type;
   typedef T2 second_type;
   ...
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<tt>std::pair</tt> is a heterogeneous container.





<hr>
<h3><a name="841"></a>841. cstdint.syn inconsistent with C99</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.4.1 [cstdint.syn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#cstdint.syn">issues</a> in [cstdint.syn].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
   <p>

In specifying the names of macros and types defined in
header <code>&lt;stdint.h&gt;</code>, C99 makes use of the
symbol <code><i>N</i></code> to accommodate unusual platforms with
word sizes that aren't powers of two. C99
permits <code><i>N</i></code> to take on any positive integer value
(including, for example, 24).

   </p>
   <p>

In  cstdint.syn Header <code>&lt;cstdint&gt;</code>
synopsis, C++ on the other hand, fixes the value
of <code><i>N</i></code> to 8, 16, 32, and 64, and specifies only
types with these exact widths. 

   </p>
   <p>
   </p>

In addition, paragraph 1 of the same section makes use of a rather
informal shorthand notation to specify sets of macros. When
interpreted strictly, the notation specifies macros such
as <code>INT_8_MIN</code> that are not intended to be specified.

   <p>

Finally, the section is missing the usual table of symbols defined
in that header, making it inconsistent with the rest of the
specification.

   </p>
 
 <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
   <p>

I propose to use the same approach in the C++ spec as C99 uses, that
is, to specify the header synopsis in terms of "exposition only" types
that make use of the symbol <code><i>N</i></code> to denote one or
more of a theoretically unbounded set of widths.

   </p>
   <p>

Further, I propose to add a new table to section listing the symbols
defined in the header using a more formal notation that avoids
introducing inconsistencies.

   </p>
   <p>

To this effect, in  cstdint.syn
Header <code>&lt;cstdint&gt;</code> synopsis, replace both the
synopsis and paragraph 1 with the following text:

   </p>
   <blockquote>
     <p>
       </p><ol>
         <li>

In the names defined in the <code>&lt;cstdint&gt;</code> header, the
symbol <code><i>N</i></code> represents a positive decimal integer
with no leading zeros (e.g., 8 or 24, but not 0, 04, or 048). With the
exception of exact-width types, macros and types for values
of <code><i>N</i></code> in the set of 8, 16, 32, and 64 are
required. Exact-width types, and any macros and types for values
of <code><i>N</i></code> other than 8, 16, 32, and 64 are
optional. However, if an implementation provides integer types with
widths of 8, 16, 32, or 64 bits, the corresponding exact-width types
and macros are required.

         </li>
       </ol>
     <p></p>
     <pre>namespace std {

   // required types

   // Fastest minimum-width integer types
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_fast8_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_fast16_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_fast32_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_fast64_t;

   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_fast8_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_fast16_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_fast32_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_fast64_t;

   // Minimum-width integer types
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_least8_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_least16_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_least32_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int_least64_t;

   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_least8_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_least16_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_least32_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_least64_t;

   // Greatest-width integer types
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   intmax_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uintmax_t;

   // optionally defined types

   // Exact-width integer types
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   int<i>N</i>_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint<i>N</i>_t;

   // Fastest minimum-width integer types for values
   // of <i>N</i> other than 8, 16, 32, and 64
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   uint_fast<i>N</i>_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_fast<i>N</i>_t;

   // Minimum-width integer types for values
   // of <i>N</i> other than 8, 16, 32, and 64
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   uint_least<i>N</i>_t;
   typedef <i>unsigned integer type</i> uint_least<i>N</i>_t;

   // Integer types capable of holding object pointers
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   intptr_t;
   typedef <i>signed integer type</i>   intptr_t;

}</pre>
   </blockquote>
   <p>

[Note to editor: Remove all of the existing paragraph 1 from  cstdint.syn.]

   </p>
   <blockquote>
     Table ??: Header <code>&lt;cstdint&gt;</code> synopsis
     <table border="1">
       <thead>
         <tr>
           <th>Type</th>
           <th colspan="3">Name(s)</th>
         </tr>
       </thead>
       <tbody>
         <tr>
           <td rowspan="11"><b>Macros:</b></td>
           <td><tt>INT<i>N</i>_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>INT<i>N</i>_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINT<i>N</i>_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>INT_FAST<i>N</i>_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>INT_FAST<i>N</i>_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINT_FAST<i>N</i>_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>INT_LEAST<i>N</i>_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>INT_LEAST<i>N</i>_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINT_LEAST<i>N</i>_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>INTPTR_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>INTPTR_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINTPTR_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>INTMAX_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>INTMAX_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINTMAX_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>PTRDIFF_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>PTRDIFF_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>PTRDIFF_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>SIG_ATOMIC_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>SIG_ATOMIC_MAX</tt></td>
           <td><tt>SIZE_MAX</tt></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>WCHAR_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>WCHAR_MAX</tt></td>
         <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>WINT_MIN</tt></td>
           <td><tt>WINT_MAX</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>INT<i>N</i>_C()</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINT<i>N</i>_C()</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>INTMAX_C()</tt></td>
           <td><tt>UINTMAX_C()</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td rowspan="5"><b>Types:</b></td>
           <td><tt>int<i>N</i>_t</tt></td>
           <td><tt>uint<i>N</i>_t</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>int_fast<i>N</i>_t</tt></td>
           <td><tt>uint_fast<i>N</i>_t</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>int_least<i>N</i>_t</tt></td>
           <td><tt>uint_least<i>N</i>_t</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>intptr_t</tt></td>
           <td><tt>uintptr_t</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
         <tr>
           <td><tt>intmax_t</tt></td>
           <td><tt>uintmax_t</tt></td>
           <td></td>
         </tr>
       </tbody>
     </table>
   </blockquote>
 




<hr>
<h3><a name="849"></a>849. missing type traits to compute root class and derived class of types in a class hierachy</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The type traits library contains various traits to dealt with
polymorphic types, e.g. <tt>std::has_virtual_destructor</tt>, <tt>std::is_polymorphic</tt>
and <tt>std::is_base_of</tt>. However, there is no way to compute the unique
public base class of a type  if such  one exists.  Such a trait could be
very useful if one needs to instantiate a specialization made for the
root class whenever a derived class is passed as parameter. For example,
imagine that you wanted to specialize <tt>std::hash</tt> for a class
hierarchy---instead of specializing each class, you could specialize the
<tt>std::hash&lt;root_class&gt;</tt> and provide a partial specialization that worked
for all derived classes.
</p>

<p>
This ability---to specify operations in terms of their equivalent in the
root class---can be done with e.g. normal functions, but there is,
AFAIK, no way to do it for class templates. Being able to access
compile-time information about the type-hierachy can be very powerful,
and I therefore also suggest traits that computes the directly derived
class whenever that is possible.
</p>

<p>
If the computation can not be done, the traits should fall back on an
identity transformation. I expect this gives the best overall usability.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the following to the synopsis in 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop] under "other transformations":
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class T &gt; struct direct_base_class;
template&lt; class T &gt; struct direct_derived_class;
template&lt; class T &gt; struct root_base_class;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add three new entries to table 51 (20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]) with the following content
</p>

<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<th>Template</th><th>Condition</th><th>Comments</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>template&lt; class T &gt; struct direct_base_class;</tt></td>
<td><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type.</td>
<td>The member typedef <tt>type</tt> shall equal the accessible unambiguous direct base class of <tt>T</tt>.
If no such type exists, the member typedef <tt>type</tt> shall equal <tt>T</tt>.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>template&lt; class T &gt; struct direct_derived_class;</tt></td>
<td><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type.</td>
<td>The member typedef <tt>type</tt> shall equal the unambiguous type which has <tt>T</tt>
as an accessible unambiguous direct base class. If no such type exists, the member typedef
<tt>type</tt> shall equal <tt>T</tt>.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>template&lt; class T &gt; struct root_base_class;</tt></td>
<td><tt>T</tt> shall be a complete type.</td>
<td>The member typedef <tt>type</tt> shall equal the accessible unambiguous most indirect base class of
<tt>T</tt>. If no such type exists, the member typedef type shall equal <tt>T</tt>.</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
2008-9-16 San Francisco:  Issue pulled by author prior to being reviewed by the LWG.





<hr>
<h3><a name="851"></a>851. simplified array construction</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Benjamin Kosnik <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
This is an issue that came up on the libstdc++ list, where a
discrepancy between "C" arrays and C++0x's <tt>std::array</tt> was pointed
out.
</p>

<p>
In "C," this array usage is possible:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>int ar[] = {1, 4, 6};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
But for C++, 
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::array&lt;int&gt; a = { 1, 4, 6 }; // error
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Instead, the second parameter of the <tt>array</tt> template must be
explicit, like so:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::array&lt;int, 3&gt; a = { 1, 4, 6 };
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Doug Gregor proposes the following solution, that assumes
generalized initializer lists.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename T, typename... Args&gt;
inline array&lt;T, sizeof...(Args)&gt; 
make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args) 
{ return { std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)... };  }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Then, the way to build an <tt>array</tt> from a list of unknown size is:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>auto a = make_array&lt;T&gt;(1, 4, 6);
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Benjamin: Move to Ready?
</p>
<p>
Bjarne: I'm not convinced this is useful enough to add, so I'd like us
to have time to reflect on it.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair: the constraints are wrong, they should be
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ValueType T, ValueType... Args&gt;
requires Convertible&lt;Args, T&gt;...
array&lt;T, sizeof...(Args)&gt; make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Alidair: this would be useful if we had a constexpr version.
</p>
<p>
Bjarne: this is probably useful for arrays with a small number of
elements, but it's not clearly useful otherwise.
</p>
<p>
Consensus is to move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-06-07 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I suggest a fix and a simplification of the current proposal: Recent
prototyping by
Howard showed, that a fix is required because narrowing conversion
8.5.4 [dcl.init.list]/6 b.3
would severely limit the possible distribution of argument types, e.g.
the expression
<tt>make_array&lt;double&gt;(1, 2.0)</tt> is ill-formed, because the narrowing
happens <em>inside</em> the
function body where no constant expressions exist anymore. Furthermore
given e.g.
</p>
<blockquote><pre>int f();
double g();
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
we probably want to support
</p>
<blockquote><pre>make_array&lt;double&gt;(f(), g());
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
as well. To make this feasible, the currently suggested expansion
</p>

<blockquote><pre>{ std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)... }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
needs to be replaced by
</p>

<blockquote><pre>{ static_cast&lt;T&gt;(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args))... }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
which is safe, because we already ensure convertibility via the
element-wise <tt>Convertible&lt;Args, T&gt;</tt> requirement. Some other fixes are
necessary: The <tt>ValueType</tt> requirement for the function <em>parameters</em>
is invalid, because all lvalue arguments will deduce to an lvalue-reference,
thereby no longer satisfying this requirement.
</p>

<p>
The suggested simplification is to provide a default-computed effective
type for the result array based on common_type and decay, in
unconstrained form:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename... Args&gt;
array&lt;typename decay&lt;typename common_type&lt;Args...&gt;::type&gt;::type,
sizeof...(Args)&gt;
make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The approach used below is similar to that of <tt>make_pair</tt> and <tt>make_tuple</tt>
using a symbol <tt>C</tt> to represent the decayed common type [Note: Special
handling of <tt>reference_wrapper</tt> types is intentionally <em>not</em> provided, because
our target has so satisfy <tt>ValueType</tt>, thus under the revised proposal only
an all-<tt>reference_wrapper</tt>-arguments would be well-formed and an array of
<tt>reference_wrapper</tt> will be constructed]. I do currently not suggest to
add new concepts reflecting <tt>decay</tt> and <tt>common_type</tt>, but an implementor will
need something like this to succeed. Note that we use a similar fuzziness for
<tt>make_pair</tt> and <tt>make_tuple</tt> currently. This fuzziness is not related to
the currently
missing <tt>Constructible&lt;Vi, Ti&amp;&amp;&gt;</tt> requirement for those functions. The following
proposal fixes that miss for <tt>make_array</tt>. If the corresponding <tt>C</tt> type
deduction is
explicitly wanted for standardization, here the implementation
</p>

<blockquote><pre>auto concept DC&lt;typename... T&gt; {
  typename type = typename decay&lt;typename common_type&lt;T...&gt;::type&gt;::type;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
where <tt>C</tt> is identical to <tt>DC&lt;Args...&gt;::type</tt> in the proposed resolution below.
</p>
<p>
I intentionally added no further type relation between type and the concept
template parameters, but instead added this requirement below to make
the specification as transparent as possible. As written this concept is
satisfied, if the corresponding associated type exists.
</p>

<p><b>Suggested Resolution:</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
Add to the array synopsis in 23.3 [sequences]:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
template&lt;ReferentType... Args&gt;
requires ValueType&lt;C&gt; &amp;&amp; IdentityOf&lt;Args&gt; &amp;&amp; Constructible&lt;C, Args&amp;&amp;&gt;...
array&lt;C, sizeof...(Args)&gt;
make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Append after 23.3.1.8 [array.tuple] Tuple interface to class template array
the following new section:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
23.4.1.7 Array creation functions [array.creation]
</p>

<pre><ins>
template&lt;ReferentType... Args&gt;
requires ValueType&lt;C&gt; &amp;&amp; IdentityOf&lt;Args&gt; &amp;&amp; Constructible&lt;C, Args&amp;&amp;&gt;...
array&lt;C, sizeof...(Args)&gt;
make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args);</ins>
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p><ins>
Let <tt>C</tt> be <tt>decay&lt;common_type&lt;Args...&gt;::type&gt;::type</tt>.
</ins></p>
<p>
<ins><i>Returns:</i> an <tt>array&lt;C, sizeof...(Args)&gt;</tt> initialized with
<tt>{ static_cast&lt;C&gt;(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args))... }</tt>.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</li>

</ol>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The proposed resolution uses concepts.
</p>
<p>
Daniel to rewrite the proposed resolution.
</p>
<p>
Leave Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-25 Daniel provides rewritten proposed resolution.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Argument for NAD future: everything about this could be added on. This
does not require changes to the existing text.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
Add to the array synopsis in 23.3 [sequences]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>template&lt;class... Args&gt;
  array&lt;<i>CT</i>, sizeof...(Args)&gt;
  make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args);</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Append after 23.3.1.8 [array.tuple] "Tuple interface to class template array" the
following new section:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<ins>XX.X.X.X Array creation functions [array.creation]</ins>
</p>

<pre><ins>
template&lt;class... Args&gt;
array&lt;<i>CT</i>, sizeof...(Args)&gt;
make_array(Args&amp;&amp;... args)
</ins></pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
<ins>Let <i>CT</i> be <tt>decay&lt;common_type&lt;Args...&gt;::type&gt;::type</tt>.</ins>
</p>
<p>
<ins><i>Returns:</i> An <tt>array&lt;<i>CT</i>, sizeof...(Args)&gt;</tt> initialized with <tt>{
static_cast&lt;<i>CT</i>&gt;(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args))... }</tt>.</ins>
</p>

<p><ins>
[<i>Example:</i>
</ins></p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
int i = 0; int&amp; ri = i;
make_array(42u, i, 2.78, ri);
</ins></pre></blockquote>
<p><ins>
returns an array of type
</ins></p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
array&lt;double, 4&gt;
</ins></pre></blockquote>

<p><ins>
�<i>end example</i>]</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>

</ol>








<hr>
<h3><a name="855"></a>855. capacity() and reserve() for deque?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herv� Br�nnimann <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-11 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The main point is that <tt>capacity</tt> can be viewed as a mechanism to  
guarantee the validity of <tt>iterators</tt> when only <tt>push_back/pop_back</tt>
operations are used.  For <tt>vector</tt>, this goes with reallocation.  For  
<tt>deque</tt>, this is a bit more subtle:  <tt>capacity()</tt> of a <tt>deque</tt> may shrink,  
whereas that of <tt>vector</tt> doesn't.   In a circular buffer impl. of the  
map, as Howard did, there is very similar notion of capacity: as long  
as <tt>size()</tt> is less than <tt>B * (</tt>total size of the map <tt>- 2)</tt>, it is  
guaranteed that no <tt>iterator</tt> is invalidated after any number of  
<tt>push_front/back</tt> and <tt>pop_front/back</tt> operations.  But this does not  
hold for other implementations.
</p>
<p>
Still, I believe, <tt>capacity()</tt> can be defined by <tt>size() +</tt>  how many  
<tt>push_front/back</tt> minus <tt>pop_front/back</tt> that can be performed before  
terators are invalidated.  In a classical impl., <tt>capacity() = size()
+ </tt> the min distance to either "physical" end of the deque (i.e.,  
counting the empty space in the last block plus all the blocks until  
the end of the map of block pointers).  In Howard's circular buffer  
impl., <tt>capacity() = B * (</tt>total size of the map <tt>- 2)</tt> still works with  
this definition, even though the guarantee could be made stronger.
</p>
<p>
A simple picture of a deque:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>A-----|----|-----|---F+|++++|++B--|-----|-----Z
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
(A,Z mark the beginning/end, | the block boundaries, F=front, B=back,  
and - are uninitialized, + are initialized)
In that picture:  <tt>capacity = size() + min(dist(A,F),dist(B,Z)) = min 
(dist(A,B),dist(F,Z))</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<tt>Reserve(n)</tt> can grow the map of pointers and add possibly a number of  
empty blocks to it, in order to guarantee that the next <tt>n-size()
push_back/push_front</tt> operations will not invalidate iterators, and  
also will not allocate (i.e. cannot throw).  The second guarantee is  
not essential and can be left as a QoI.  I know well enough existing  
implementations of <tt>deque</tt> (sgi/stl, roguewave, stlport, and  
dinkumware) to know that either can be implemented with no change to  
the existing class layout and code, and only a few modifications if  
blocks are pre-allocated (instead of always allocating a new block,  
check if the next entry in the map of block pointers is not zero).
</p>
<p>
Due to the difference with <tt>vector</tt>, wording is crucial.  Here's a  
proposed wording to make things concrete;  I tried to be reasonably  
careful but please double-check me:
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Hans: should the Returns clause for capacity read "1 Returns: A lower
bound..." rather than "1 Returns: An upper bound..."
</p>
<p>
Howard: maybe what's needed is capacity_front and capacity_back. In
fact, I think I implemented a deque that had these members as
implementation details.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Add new signatures to synopsis in 23.3.2 [deque]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>size_type capacity() const;
bool reserve(size_type n);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add new signatures to 23.3.2.2 [deque.capacity]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>size_type capacity() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
1 <i>Returns:</i> An upper bound on <tt>n + max(n_f - m_f, n_b - m_b)</tt>  such  
that, for any sequence of <tt>n_f push_front</tt>, <tt>m_f pop_front</tt>, <tt>n_b  
push_back</tt>, and <tt>m_b pop_back</tt> operations, interleaved in any order,  
starting with the current <tt>deque</tt> of size <tt>n</tt>, the <tt>deque</tt> does not  
invalidate any of its iterators except to the erased elements.
</p>
<p>
2 <i>Remarks:</i>  Unlike a <tt>vector</tt>'s capacity, the capacity of a <tt>deque</tt> can  
decrease after a sequence of insertions at both ends, even if none of  
the operations caused the <tt>deque</tt> to invalidate any of its iterators  
except to the erased elements.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
<pre>bool reserve(size_type n);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
2 <i>Effects:</i> A directive that informs a <tt>deque</tt> of a planned sequence of  
<tt>push_front</tt>, <tt>pop_front</tt>, <tt>push_back</tt>, and <tt>pop_back</tt> operations, so that it  
can manage iterator invalidation accordingly. After <tt>reserve()</tt>,  
<tt>capacity()</tt> is greater or equal to the argument of <tt>reserve</tt> if this  
operation returns <tt>true</tt>; and equal to the previous value of <tt>capacity()</tt>
otherwise.  If an exception is thrown, there are no effects.
</p>
<p>
3 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> if iterators are invalidated as a result of this  
operation, and false otherwise.
</p>
<p>
4 <i>Complexity:</i> It does not change the size of the sequence and takes  
at most linear time in <tt>n</tt>.
</p>
<p>
5 <i>Throws:</i> <tt>length_error</tt> if <tt>n &gt; max_size()</tt>.
</p>
<p>
6 <i>Remarks:</i> It is guaranteed that no invalidation takes place during a  
sequence of <tt>insert</tt> or <tt>erase</tt> operations at either end that happens  
after a call to <tt>reserve()</tt> except to the erased elements, until the  
time when an insertion would make <tt>max(n_f-m_f, n_b-m_b)</tt> larger than  
<tt>capacity()</tt>, where <tt>n_f</tt> is the number of <tt>push_front</tt>, <tt>m_f</tt> of <tt>pop_front</tt>,  
<tt>n_b</tt> of <tt>push_back</tt>, and <tt>m_b</tt> of <tt>pop_back</tt> operations since the call to  
<tt>reserve()</tt>.
</p>
<p>
7        An implementation is free to pre-allocate buffers so as to  
offer the additional guarantee that no exception will be thrown  
during such a sequence other than by the element constructors.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
And 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers] para 1, can be enhanced:
</p>

<blockquote>
1 <i>Effects:</i> An insertion in the middle of the deque invalidates all the iterators and references to elements of the
deque. An insertion at either end of the deque invalidates all the iterators to the deque,
<ins>unless provisions have been made with reserve,</ins>
but has no effect on the validity of references to elements of the deque.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Complication outweighs the benefit.





<hr>
<h3><a name="862"></a>862. Impossible complexity for 'includes'</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.5.1 [includes] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-02 <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#includes">issues</a> in [includes].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 25.4.5.1 [includes] the complexity is "at most -1 comparisons" if passed
two empty ranges.  I don't know how to perform a negative number of
comparisions!
</p>

<p>
This same issue also applies to:
</p>

<ul>
<li><tt>set_union</tt></li>
<li><tt>set_intersection</tt></li>
<li><tt>set_difference</tt></li>
<li><tt>set_symmetric_difference</tt></li>
<li><tt>merge</tt></li>
</ul>

<p><i>[
2009-03-30 Beman adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Suggest NAD. The complexity of empty ranges is -1 in other places in the
standard. See 25.4.4 [alg.merge] <tt>merge</tt> and
<tt>inplace_merge</tt>, and <tt>forward_list</tt> merge, for example.
The time and effort to find and fix all places in the standard where
empty range[s] result in negative complexity isn't worth the very
limited benefit.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-09 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I'm not happy with NAD if we can find a simple solution.
</p>
<p>
How about adding a rider somewhere in clause 17 suggesting that complexities
that specify a negative number of operations are treated as specifying zero
operations?  That should generically solve the issue without looking for
further cases.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Pete to provide "straightforward" wording.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="863"></a>863. What is the state of a stream after close() succeeds</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Steve Clamage <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-08 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Suppose writing to an <tt>[o]fstream</tt> fails and you later close the <tt>stream</tt>.
The <tt>overflow()</tt> function is called to flush the buffer (if it exists).
Then the file is unconditionally closed, as if by calling <tt>flcose</tt>.
</p>
<p>
If either <tt>overflow</tt> or <tt>fclose</tt> fails, <tt>close()</tt> reports failure, and clearly
the <tt>stream</tt> should be in a failed or bad state.
</p>
<p>
Suppose the buffer is empty or non-existent (so that <tt>overflow()</tt> does not
fail), and <tt>fclose</tt> succeeds. The <tt>close()</tt> function reports success, but
what is the state of the <tt>stream</tt>?
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Tom's impression is that the issue is about the <tt>failbit</tt>, etc.
</p>
<p>
Bill responds that the stream is now closed,
and any status bits remain unchanged.
</p>
<p>
See the description of <tt>close()</tt> in 27.9.1.17 [fstream.members].
</p>
<p>
We prefer not to add wording to say that nothing changes.
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="864"></a>864. Defect in atomic wording</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-10 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There's an error in 29.6 [atomics.types.operations]/p9:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>C atomic_load(const volatile A * object);
C atomic_load_explicit(const volatile A * object, memory_order);
C A ::load(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) const volatile;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> The <tt>order</tt> argument shall not be <tt>memory_order_acquire</tt> nor
<tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
I believe that this should state
</p>
<blockquote>
shall not be <tt>memory_order_release</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p>
There's also an error in 29.6 [atomics.types.operations]/p17:
</p>

<blockquote>
... When only one <tt>memory_order</tt> argument is supplied, the value of success
is <tt>order</tt>, and
the value of failure is <tt>order</tt> except that a value of
<tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt> shall be replaced by the value
<tt>memory_order_require</tt> ...
</blockquote>
<p>
I believe this should state
</p>
<blockquote>
shall be replaced by the value <tt>memory_order_acquire</tt> ...
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations]/p9:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>C atomic_load(const volatile A * object);
C atomic_load_explicit(const volatile A * object, memory_order);
C A ::load(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) const volatile;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> The <tt>order</tt> argument shall not be <del><tt>memory_order_acquire</tt></del>
<ins><tt>memory_order_release</tt></ins> nor <tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations]/p17:
</p>

<blockquote>
... When only one <tt>memory_order</tt> argument is supplied, the value of success
is <tt>order</tt>, and
the value of failure is <tt>order</tt> except that a value of
<tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt> shall be replaced by the value
<del><tt>memory_order_require</tt></del> <ins><tt>memory_order_acquire</tt></ins> ...
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Already fixed by the time the LWG processed it.





<hr>
<h3><a name="867"></a>867. Valarray and value-initialization</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2008-07-20 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
From 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons], paragraph 2:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit  valarray(size_t);
</pre>
<blockquote>
The array created by this constructor has a length equal to the value of the argument. The elements
of the array are constructed using the default constructor for the instantiating type <tt>T</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
The problem is that the most obvious <tt>T</tt>s for <tt>valarray</tt> are <tt>float</tt>
and <tt>double</tt>, they don't have a default constructor. I guess the intent is to value-initialize
the elements, so I suggest replacing:
</p>

<blockquote>
The elements of the array are constructed using the default constructor for the instantiating type <tt>T</tt>.
</blockquote>
<p>
with
</p>
<blockquote>
The elements of the array are value-initialized.
</blockquote>

<p>
There is another reference to the default constructor of <tt>T</tt> in the non-normative note in paragraph 9.
That reference should also be replaced. (The normative wording in paragraph 8 refers to <tt>T()</tt>
and so it doesn't need changes).
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 26.6.2.1 [valarray.cons], paragraph 2:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>explicit  valarray(size_t);
</pre>
<blockquote>
The array created by this constructor has a length equal to the value of the argument. The elements
of the array are <del>constructed using the default constructor for the instantiating type <tt>T</tt></del>
<ins>value-initialized (8.5 [dcl.init])</ins>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 26.6.2.7 [valarray.members], paragraph 9:
</p>

<blockquote>
[<i>Example:</i> If the argument has the value -2, the first two elements of the result will be <del>constructed using the 
default constructor</del>
<ins>value-initialized (8.5 [dcl.init])</ins>;
the third element of the result will be assigned the value of the first element of the argument; etc. <i>-- end example</i>]
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="873"></a>873. signed integral type and unsigned integral type are not clearly defined</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 3.9.1 [basic.fundamental] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Travis Vitek <b>Opened:</b> 2008-06-30 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
    <p>
      Neither the term "signed integral type" nor the term "unsigned
      integral type" is defined in the core language section of the
      standard, therefore the library section should avoid its use.  The
      terms <i>signed integer type</i> and <i>unsigned integer type</i> are
      indeed defined (in 3.9.1 [basic.fundamental]), thus the usages should be
      replaced accordingly.
    </p>

    <p>
      Note that the key issue here is that "signed" + "integral type" !=
      "signed integral type".
      
      The types <code>bool</code>, <code>char</code>, <code>char16_t</code>,
      <code>char32_t</code> and <code>wchar_t</code> are all listed as
      integral types, but are neither of <i>signed integer type</i> or
      <i>unsigned integer type</i>. According to 3.9 [basic.types] p7, a synonym for
      integral type is <i>integer type</i>.
      
      Given this, one may choose to assume that an <i>integral type</i> that
      can represent values less than zero is a <i>signed integral type</i>.
      Unfortunately this can cause ambiguities.
      
      As an example, if <code>T</code> is <code>unsigned char</code>, the
      expression <code>make_signed&lt;T&gt;::type</code>, is supposed to
      name a signed integral type. There are potentially two types that
      satisfy this requirement, namely <code>signed char</code> and
      <code>char</code> (assuming <code>CHAR_MIN &lt; 0</code>).
    </p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Plum, Sebor to review.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposed resolution needs to be "conceptualized". Currently we have
in  [concept.support] only concept <tt>IntegralType</tt>
for all "integral types", thus indeed the current <tt>Container</tt>
concept and Iterator concepts are sufficiently satisfied with "integral
types". If the changes are applied, we might ask core for concept
<tt>BilateralIntegerType</tt> and add proper restrictions to the library
concepts.
</blockquote>

  

  <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
    <p>
      I propose to use the terms "signed integer type" and "unsigned integer
      type" in place of "signed integral type" and "unsigned integral type"
      to eliminate such ambiguities.
    </p>
    
    <p>
      The proposed change makes it absolutely clear that the difference
      between two pointers cannot be <tt>char</tt> or <tt>wchar_t</tt>,
      but could be any of the signed integer types.
      5.7 [expr.add] paragraph 6...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      <p>
        </p><ol>
          <li>
            When two pointers to elements of the same array object are
            subtracted, the result is the difference of the subscripts of
            the two array elements. The type of the result is an
            implementation-defined <del>signed integral
            type</del><ins>signed integer type</ins>; this type shall be the
            same type that is defined as <code>std::ptrdiff_t</code> in the
            <code>&lt;cstdint&gt;</code> header (18.1)...
          </li>
        </ol>
      <p></p>
    </blockquote>

    <p>
      The proposed change makes it clear that <tt>X::size_type</tt> and
      <tt>X::difference_type</tt> cannot be <tt>char</tt> or
      <tt>wchar_t</tt>, but could be one of the signed or unsigned integer
      types as appropriate.
      20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] table 40...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Table 40: Allocator requirements
      <table border="1">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th>expression</th>
            <th>return type</th>
            <th>assertion/note/pre/post-condition</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>X::size_type</tt></td>
            <td>
              <del>unsigned integral type</del>
              <ins>unsigned integer type</ins>
            </td>
            <td>a type that can represent the size of the largest object in
            the allocation model.</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>X::difference_type</tt></td>
            <td>
              <del>signed integral type</del>
              <ins>signed integer type</ins>
            </td>
            <td>a type that can represent the difference between any two
            pointers in the allocation model.</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </blockquote>

    <p>
      The proposed change makes it clear that <tt>make_signed&lt;T&gt;::type</tt>
      must be one of the signed integer types as defined in 3.9.1. Ditto for
      <tt>make_unsigned&lt;T&gt;type</tt> and unsigned integer types.
      20.7.7.3 [meta.trans.sign] table 48...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Table 48: Sign modifications
      <table border="1">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th>Template</th>
            <th>Comments</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td>
              <tt>template &lt;class T&gt; struct make_signed;</tt>
            </td>
            <td>
              If <code>T</code> names a (possibly cv-qualified) <del>signed
              integral type</del><ins>signed integer type</ins> (3.9.1) then
              the member typedef <code>type</code> shall name the type
              <code>T</code>; otherwise, if <code>T</code> names a (possibly
              cv-qualified) <del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned
              integer type</ins> then <code>type</code> shall name the
              corresponding <del>signed integral type</del><ins>signed
              integer type</ins>, with the same cv-qualifiers as
              <code>T</code>; otherwise, <code>type</code> shall name the
              <del>signed integral type</del><ins>signed integer type</ins>
              with the smallest rank (4.13) for which <code>sizeof(T) ==
              sizeof(type)</code>, with the same cv-qualifiers as
              <code>T</code>.

              <i>Requires:</i> <code>T</code> shall be a (possibly
              cv-qualified) integral type or enumeration but not a
              <code>bool</code> type.
            </td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td>
              <tt>template &lt;class T&gt; struct make_unsigned;</tt>
            </td>
            <td>
              If <code>T</code> names a (possibly cv-qualified)
              <del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer
              type</ins> (3.9.1) then the member typedef <code>type</code>
              shall name the type <code>T</code>; otherwise, if
              <code>T</code> names a (possibly cv-qualified) <del>signed
              integral type</del><ins>signed integer type</ins> then
              <code>type</code> shall name the corresponding <del>unsigned
              integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer type</ins>, with the
              same cv-qualifiers as <code>T</code>; otherwise,
              <code>type</code> shall name the <del>unsigned integral
              type</del><ins>unsigned integer type</ins> with the smallest
              rank (4.13) for which <code>sizeof(T) == sizeof(type)</code>,
              with the same cv-qualifiers as <code>T</code>.

              <i>Requires:</i> <code>T</code> shall be a (possibly
              cv-qualified) integral type or enumeration but not a
              <code>bool</code> type.
            </td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </blockquote>


    <p>
      Note: I believe that the basefield values should probably be
      prefixed with <tt>ios_base::</tt> as they are in 22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals]

      The listed virtuals are all overloaded on signed and unsigned integer
      types, the new wording just maintains consistency.

      22.4.2.1.2 [facet.num.get.virtuals] table 78...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Table 78: Integer Conversions
      <table border="1">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th>State</th>
            <th><tt>stdio</tt> equivalent</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>basefield == oct</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%o</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>basefield == hex</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%X</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>basefield == 0</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%i</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><del>signed integral type</del><ins>signed integer
            type</ins></td>
            <td><tt>%d</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer
            type</ins></td>
            <td><tt>%u</tt></td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </blockquote>

    
    
    <p>
      Rationale is same as above.
      22.4.2.2.2 [facet.num.put.virtuals] table 80...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Table 80: Integer Conversions
      <table border="1">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th>State</th>
            <th><tt>stdio</tt> equivalent</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>basefield == ios_base::oct</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%o</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>(basefield == ios_base::hex) &amp;&amp;
            !uppercase</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%x</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>(basefield == ios_base::hex)</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%X</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>basefield == 0</tt></td>
            <td><tt>%i</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td>for a <del>signed integral type</del><ins>signed integer
            type</ins></td>
            <td><tt>%d</tt></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td>for a <del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer
            type</ins></td>
            <td><tt>%u</tt></td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </blockquote>

    
    <p>
      23.2 [container.requirements] table 80...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Table 89: Container requirements
      <table border="1">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th>expression</th>
            <th>return type</th>
            <th>operational semantics</th>
            <th>assertion/note/pre/post-condition</th>
            <th>complexity</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>X::difference_type</tt></td>
            <td><del>signed integral type</del><ins>signed integer type</ins></td>
            <td>&nbsp;</td>
            <td>is identical to the difference type of <tt>X::iterator</tt>
            and <tt>X::const_iterator</tt></td>
            <td>compile time</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td><tt>X::size_type</tt></td>
            <td><del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer type</ins></td>
            <td>&nbsp;</td>
            <td><tt>size_type</tt> can represent any non-negative value of
            <tt>difference_type</tt></td>
            <td>compile time</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </blockquote>

    <p>
      X [iterator.concepts] paragraph 1...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Iterators are a generalization of pointers that allow a C++ program to
      work with different data structures (containers) in a uniform manner.
      To be able to construct template algorithms that work correctly and
      efficiently on different types of data structures, the library
      formalizes not just the interfaces but also the semantics and
      complexity assumptions of iterators. All input iterators
      <code>i</code> support the expression <code>*i</code>, resulting in a
      value of some class, enumeration, or built-in type <code>T</code>,
      called the <i>value type</i> of the iterator. All output iterators
      support the expression <code>*i = o</code> where <code>o</code> is a
      value of some type that is in the set of types that are
      <i>writable</i> to the particular iterator type of <code>i</code>. All
      iterators <code>i</code> for which the expression <code>(*i).m</code>
      is well-defined, support the expression <code>i-&gt;m</code> with the
      same semantics as <code>(*i).m</code>. For every iterator type
      <code>X</code> for which equality is defined, there is a corresponding
      <del>signed integral type</del> <ins>signed integer type</ins> called
      the <i>difference type</i> of the iterator.
    </blockquote>
    
    <p>
      I'm a little unsure of this change. Previously this paragraph would
      allow instantiations of <tt>linear_congruential_engine</tt> on
      <tt>char</tt>, <tt>wchar_t</tt>, <tt>bool</tt>, and other types. The
      new wording prohibits this.
      26.5.3.1 [rand.eng.lcong] paragraph 2...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      The template parameter <code>UIntType</code> shall denote an
      <del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer type</ins>
      large enough to store values as large as <code>m - 1</code>. If the
      template parameter <code>m</code> is 0, the modulus <code>m</code>
      used throughout this section 26.4.3.1 is
      <code>numeric_limits&lt;result_type&gt;::max()</code> plus 1.  [Note:
      The result need not be representable as a value of type
      <code>result_type</code>. --end note] Otherwise, the following
      relations shall hold: <code>a &lt; m</code> and <code>c &lt;
      m</code>.
    </blockquote>
    
    <p>
      Same rationale as the previous change.
      X [rand.adapt.xor] paragraph 6...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      Both <code>Engine1::result_type</code> and
      <code>Engine2::result_type</code> shall denote (possibly different)
      <del>unsigned integral types</del><ins>unsigned integer types</ins>.
      The member <i>result_type</i> shall denote either the type
      <i>Engine1::result_type</i> or the type <i>Engine2::result_type</i>,
      whichever provides the most storage according to clause 3.9.1.
    </blockquote>
    
    <p>
      26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] paragraph 7...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      <i>Requires:</i><code>RandomAccessIterator</code> shall meet the
      requirements of a random access iterator (24.1.5) such that
      <code>iterator_traits&lt;RandomAccessIterator&gt;::value_type</code>
      shall denote an <del>unsigned integral type</del><ins>unsigned integer
      type</ins> capable of accomodating 32-bit quantities.  
    </blockquote>

    <p>
      By making this change, integral types that happen to have a signed
      representation, but are not signed integer types, would no longer be
      required to use a two's complement representation. This may go against
      the original intent, and should be reviewed.
      29.6 [atomics.types.operations] paragraph 24...
    </p>
    <blockquote>
      <i>Remark:</i> For <del>signed integral types</del><ins>signed integer
      types</ins>, arithmetic is defined using two's complement
      representation. There are no undefined results. For address types, the
      result may be an undefined address, but the operations otherwise have
      no undefined behavior.
    </blockquote>
    
  




<hr>
<h3><a name="874"></a>874. Missing <tt>initializer_list</tt> constructor for <tt>discrete_distribution</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#rand.dist.samp.discrete">issues</a> in [rand.dist.samp.discrete].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
During the Sophia Antipolis meeting it was decided to separate from <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#793">793</a> a
subrequest that adds initializer list support to
<tt>discrete_distribution</tt>, specifically,
the issue proposed to add a c'tor taking a <tt>initializer_list&lt;double&gt;</tt>.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.1 [rand.dist.samp.discrete]/1, class <tt>discrete_distribution</tt>,
just <em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit discrete_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
insert
</p>

<blockquote><pre>discrete_distribution(initializer_list&lt;double&gt; wl);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 of the same section insert a new
paragraph as part of the new member description:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>discrete_distribution(initializer_list&lt;double&gt; wl);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> Same as <tt>discrete_distribution(wl.begin(), wl.end())</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="875"></a>875. Missing <tt>initializer_list</tt> constructor for <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt></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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
During the Sophia Antipolis meeting it was decided to separate from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#794">794</a> a subrequest that adds initializer list support to
<tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>, specifically, the issue proposed
to add a c'tor taking a <tt>initializer_list&lt;double&gt;</tt> and a <tt>Callable</tt> to evaluate
weight values. For consistency with the remainder of this class and
the remainder of the <tt>initializer_list</tt>-aware library the author decided to
change the list argument type to the template parameter <tt>RealType</tt>
instead. For the reasoning to use <tt>Func</tt> instead of <tt>Func&amp;&amp;</tt> as c'tor
function argument see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#793">793</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><b>Non-concept version of the proposed resolution</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]/1, class <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>,
just <em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit piecewise_constant_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
insert
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Func&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(initializer_list&lt;RealType&gt; bl, Func fw);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 of the same section insert a series of
new paragraphs nominated below as [p5_1], [p5_2], and [p5_3]
as part of the new member description:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Func&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(initializer_list&lt;RealType&gt; bl, Func fw);
</pre>

<blockquote>

<p>
[p5_1] <i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt>nf = max(bl.size(), 1) - 1</tt> invocations of <tt>fw</tt>.
</p>

<p>
[p5_2] <i>Requires:</i>
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
<tt>fw</tt> shall be callable with one argument of type <tt>RealType</tt>, and shall
   return values of a type convertible to <tt>double</tt>;
</li>
<li>
The relation <tt>0 &lt; S = w<sub>0</sub>+. . .+w<sub>n-1</sub></tt> shall hold. 
For all sampled values <tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt> defined below, <tt>fw(<i>x<sub>k</sub></i>)</tt> shall return a weight
   value <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt> that is non-negative, non-NaN, and non-infinity;
</li>
<li>
If <tt>nf &gt; 0</tt> let <tt>b<sub><i>k</i></sub> = *(bl.begin() + k), k = 0, . . . , bl.size()-1</tt> and the
following relations shall hold for <tt>k = 0, . . . , nf-1: b<sub><i>k</i></sub> &lt; b<sub><i>k+1</i></sub></tt>.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
[p5_3] <i>Effects:</i>
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
<p>If <tt>nf == 0</tt>,</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
lets the sequence <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n = 1</tt> and consist of the single
     value <tt>w<sub>0</sub> = 1</tt>, and
</li>
<li>
lets the sequence <tt>b</tt> have length <tt>n+1</tt> with <tt>b<sub>0</sub> = 0</tt> and <tt>b<sub>1</sub> = 1</tt>.
</li>
</ol>
</li>

<li>
<p>Otherwise,</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
sets <tt>n = nf</tt>, and <tt>[bl.begin(), bl.end())</tt> shall form the sequence <tt>b</tt> of
length <tt>n+1</tt>, and
</li>
<li>
<p>lets the sequences <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n</tt> and for each <tt>k = 0, . . . ,n-1</tt>,
     calculates:</p>
<blockquote><pre>x<sub><i>k</i></sub> = 0.5*(b<sub><i>k+1</i></sub> + b<sub><i>k</i></sub>)
w<sub><i>k</i></sub> = fw(x<sub><i>k</i></sub>)
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Constructs a <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> object with
the above computed sequence <tt>b</tt> as the interval boundaries
and with the probability densities:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>&#961;<sub><i>k</i></sub> = w<sub><i>k</i></sub>/(S * (b<sub><i>k+1</i></sub> - b<sub><i>k</i></sub>)) for k = 0, . . . , n-1.
</pre></blockquote>

</li>
</ol>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

<p><b>Concept version of the proposed resolution</b></p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 26.5.8.5.2 [rand.dist.samp.pconst]/1, class <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt>,
just <em>before</em> the member declaration
</p>

<blockquote><pre>explicit piecewise_constant_distribution(const param_type&amp; parm);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
insert
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Callable&lt;auto, RealType&gt; Func&gt;
 requires Convertible&lt;Func::result_type, double&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(initializer_list&lt;RealType&gt; bl, Func fw);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Between p.4 and p.5 of the same section insert a series of
new paragraphs nominated below as [p5_1], [p5_2], and [p5_3]
as part of the new member description:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Callable&lt;auto, RealType&gt; Func&gt;
 requires Convertible&lt;Func::result_type, double&gt;
piecewise_constant_distribution(initializer_list&lt;RealType&gt; bl, Func fw);
</pre>

<blockquote>

<p>
[p5_1] <i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt>nf = max(bl.size(), 1) - 1</tt> invocations of <tt>fw</tt>.
</p>

<p>
[p5_2] <i>Requires:</i>
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
The relation <tt>0 &lt; S = w<sub>0</sub>+. . .+w<sub>n-1</sub></tt> shall hold. 
For all sampled values <tt><i>x<sub>k</sub></i></tt> defined below, <tt>fw(<i>x<sub>k</sub></i>)</tt> shall return a weight
   value <tt><i>w<sub>k</sub></i></tt> that is non-negative, non-NaN, and non-infinity;
</li>
<li>
If <tt>nf &gt; 0</tt> let <tt>b<sub><i>k</i></sub> = *(bl.begin() + k), k = 0, . . . , bl.size()-1</tt> and the
following relations shall hold for <tt>k = 0, . . . , nf-1: b<sub><i>k</i></sub> &lt; b<sub><i>k+1</i></sub></tt>.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
[p5_3] <i>Effects:</i>
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
<p>If <tt>nf == 0</tt>,</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
lets the sequence <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n = 1</tt> and consist of the single
     value <tt>w<sub>0</sub> = 1</tt>, and
</li>
<li>
lets the sequence <tt>b</tt> have length <tt>n+1</tt> with <tt>b<sub>0</sub> = 0</tt> and <tt>b<sub>1</sub> = 1</tt>.
</li>
</ol>
</li>

<li>
<p>Otherwise,</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
sets <tt>n = nf</tt>, and <tt>[bl.begin(), bl.end())</tt> shall form the sequence <tt>b</tt> of
length <tt>n+1</tt>, and
</li>
<li>
<p>lets the sequences <tt>w</tt> have length <tt>n</tt> and for each <tt>k = 0, . . . ,n-1</tt>,
     calculates:</p>
<blockquote><pre>x<sub><i>k</i></sub> = 0.5*(b<sub><i>k+1</i></sub> + b<sub><i>k</i></sub>)
w<sub><i>k</i></sub> = fw(x<sub><i>k</i></sub>)
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Constructs a <tt>piecewise_constant_distribution</tt> object with
the above computed sequence <tt>b</tt> as the interval boundaries
and with the probability densities:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>&#961;<sub><i>k</i></sub> = w<sub><i>k</i></sub>/(S * (b<sub><i>k+1</i></sub> - b<sub><i>k</i></sub>)) for k = 0, . . . , n-1.
</pre></blockquote>

</li>
</ol>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a> "Wording Tweaks for Concept-enabled Random Number Generation in C++0X".





<hr>
<h3><a name="877"></a>877. to <tt>throw()</tt> or to <i>Throw:</i> Nothing.</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-23 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
       <p>

Recent changes to
the <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2691.pdf">working
draft</a> have introduced a gratuitous inconsistency with the C++ 2003
version of the specification with respect to exception guarantees
provided by standard functions. While the C++ 2003 standard
consistenly uses the empty exception specification, <tt>throw()</tt>,
to declare functions that are guaranteed not to throw exceptions, the
current working draft contains a number of "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing."
clause to specify essentially the same requirement. The difference
between the two approaches is that the former specifies the behavior
of programs that violate the requirement (<tt>std::unexpected()</tt>
is called) while the latter leaves the behavior undefined.

       </p>
       <p>

A survey of the working draft reveals that there are a total of 209
occurrences of <tt>throw()</tt> in the library portion of the spec,
the majority in clause 18, a couple (literally) in 19, a handful in
20, a bunch in 22, four in 24, one in 27, and about a dozen in D.9.

       </p>
       <p>

There are also 203 occurrences of "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." scattered
throughout the spec.

       </p>
       <p>

While sometimes there are good reasons to use the "<i>Throws:</i>
Nothing."  approach rather than making use of <tt>throw()</tt>, these
reasons do not apply in most of the cases where this new clause has
been introduced and the empty exception specification would be a
better approach.

       </p>
       <p>

First, functions declared with the empty exception specification
permit compilers to generate better code for calls to such
functions. In some cases, the compiler might even be able to eliminate
whole chunks of user-written code when instantiating a generic
template on a type whose operations invoked from the template
specialization are known not to throw. The prototypical example are
the <tt>std::uninitialized_copy()</tt>
and <tt>std::uninitialized_fill()</tt> algorithms where the
entire <tt>catch(...)</tt> block can be optimized away.

       </p>
       <p>

For example, given the following definition of
the <tt>std::uninitialized_copy</tt> function template and a
user-defined type <tt>SomeType</tt>:

       </p>
       <blockquote>
           <pre>template &lt;class InputIterator, class ForwardIterator&gt;
ForwardIterator
uninitialized_copy (InputIterator first, InputIterator last, ForwardIterator res)
{
   typedef iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;::value_type ValueType;

   ForwardIterator start = res;

   try {
       for (; first != last; ++first, ++res)
           ::new (&amp;*res) ValueType (*first);
   }
   catch (...) {
       for (; start != res; --start)
           (&amp;*start)-&gt;~ValueType ();
       throw;
   }
   return res;
}

struct SomeType {
   SomeType (const SomeType&amp;) <ins>throw ()</ins>;
}</pre>
       </blockquote>
       <p>

compilers are able to emit the following efficient specialization
of <tt>std::uninitialized_copy&lt;const SomeType*, SomeType*&gt;</tt>
(note that the <tt>catch</tt> block has been optimized away):

       </p>
       <blockquote>
           <pre>template &lt;&gt; SomeType*
uninitialized_copy (const SomeType *first, const SomeType *last, SomeType *res)
{
   for (; first != last; ++first, ++res)
       ::new (res) SomeType (*first);

   return res;
}</pre>
       </blockquote>
       <p>

Another general example is default constructors which, when decorated
with <tt>throw()</tt>, allow the compiler to eliminate the
implicit <tt>try</tt> and <tt>catch</tt> blocks that it otherwise must
emit around each the invocation of the constructor
in <i>new-expressions</i>.

       </p>
       <p>

For example, given the following definitions of
class <tt>MayThrow</tt> and <tt>WontThrow</tt> and the two
statements below:

       </p>
       <blockquote>
           <pre>struct MayThrow {
   MayThrow ();
};

struct WontThrow {
   WontThrow () <ins>throw ()</ins>;
};

MayThrow  *a = new MayThrow [N];
WontThrow *b = new WontThrow [N];</pre>

       </blockquote>
       <p>

the compiler generates the following code for the first statement:

       </p>
       <blockquote>
           <pre>MayThrow *a;
{
   MayThrow *first = operator new[] (N * sizeof (*a));
   MayThrow *last  = first + N;
   MayThrow *next  = first;
   try {
       for ( ; next != last; ++next)
           new (next) MayThrow;
   }
   catch (...) {
       for ( ; first != first; --next)
           next-&gt;~MayThrow ();
       operator delete[] (first);
       throw;
   }
   a = first;
}</pre>
       </blockquote>
       <p>

but it is can generate much more compact code for the second statement:

       </p>
       <blockquote>
           <pre>WontThrow *b    = operator new[] (N * sizeof (*b));
WontThrow *last = b + N;
for (WontThrow *next = b; next != last; ++next)
   new (next) WontThrow;
</pre>
       </blockquote>
       <p>

Second, in order for users to get the maximum benefit out of the new
<tt>std::has_nothrow_xxx</tt> traits when using standard library types
it will be important for implementations to decorate all non throwing
copy constructors and assignment operators with <tt>throw()</tt>. Note
that while an optimizer may be able to tell whether a function without
an explicit exception specification can throw or not based on its
definition, it can only do so when it can see the source code of the
definition. When it can't it must assume that the function may
throw. To prevent violating the One Definition Rule,
the <tt>std::has_nothrow_xxx</tt> trait must return the most
pessimistic guess across all translation units in the program, meaning
that <tt>std::has_nothrow_xxx&lt;T&gt;::value</tt> must evaluate to
<tt>false</tt> for any <tt>T</tt> whose <tt>xxx</tt>
(where <tt>xxx</tt> is default or copy ctor, or assignment operator)
is defined out-of-line.

       </p>
       <p>

<b>Counterarguments:</b>

       </p>
       <p>

During the discussion of this issue
on <a href="mailto:c++std-lib@accu.org">c++std-lib@accu.org</a>
(starting with post <tt>c++std-lib-21950</tt>) the following arguments
in favor of the "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." style have been made.

       </p>
       <p>
         </p><ol>
           <li>

Decorating functions that cannot throw with the empty exception
specification can cause the compiler to generate suboptimal code for
the implementation of the function when it calls other functions that
aren't known to the compiler not to throw (i.e., that aren't decorated
with <tt>throw()</tt> even if they don't actually throw). This is a
common situation when the called function is a C or POSIX function.

           </li>
           <li>

Alternate, proprietary mechanisms exist (such as
GCC <a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/Function-Attributes.html#index-g_t_0040code_007bnothrow_007d-function-attribute-2160"><tt>__attribute__((nothrow))</tt></a>
or Visual
C++ <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/49147z04(VS.80).aspx"><tt>__declspec(nothrow)</tt></a>)
that let implementers mark up non-throwing functions, often without
the penalty mentioned in (1) above. The C++ standard shouldn't
preclude the use of these potentially more efficient mechanisms.

           </li>
           <li>

There are functions, especially function templates, that invoke
user-defined functions that may or may not be
declared <tt>throw()</tt>. Declaring such functions with the empty
exception specification will cause compilers to generate suboptimal
code when the user-defined function isn't also declared not to throw.

           </li>
        </ol>
       <p></p>
       <p>

The answer to point (1) above is that implementers can (and some have)
declare functions with <tt>throw()</tt> to indicate to the compiler
that calls to the function can safely be assumed not to throw in order
to allow it to generate efficient code at the call site without also
having to define the functions the same way and causing the compiler
to generate suboptimal code for the function definition. That is, the
function is declared with <tt>throw()</tt> in a header but it's
defined without it in the source file. The <tt>throw()</tt>
declaration is suppressed when compiling the definition to avoid
compiler errors. This technique, while strictly speaking no permitted
by the language, is safe and has been employed in practice. For
example, the GNU C library takes this approach. Microsoft Visual C++
takes a similar approach by simply assuming that no function with C
language linkage can throw an exception unless it's explicitly
declared to do so using the language extension <tt>throw(...)</tt>.

       </p>
       <p>

Our answer to point (2) above is that there is no existing practice
where C++ Standard Library implementers have opted to make use of the
proprietary mechanisms to declare functions that don't throw. The
language provides a mechanism specifically designed for this
purpose. Avoiding its use in the specification itself in favor of
proprietary mechanisms defeats the purpose of the feature. In
addition, making use of the empty exception specification
inconsistently, in some areas of the standard, while conspicuously
avoiding it and making use of the "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." form in
others is confusing to users.

       </p>
       <p>

The answer to point (3) is simply to exercise caution when declaring
functions and especially function templates with the empty exception
specification. Functions that required not to throw but that may call
back into user code are poor candidates for the empty exception
specification and should instead be specified using "<i>Throws:</i>
Nothing." clause.

      </p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We need someone to do an extensive review.
</p>
<p>
NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>

   
   <p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
       <p>

We propose two possible solutions. Our recommendation is to adopt
Option 1 below.

       </p>
       <p>

<b>Option 1:</b>

       </p>
       <p>

Except for functions or function templates that make calls back to
user-defined functions that may not be declared <tt>throw()</tt>
replace all occurrences of the "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." clause with
the empty exception specification. Functions that are required not to
throw but that make calls back to user code should be specified to
"<i>Throw:</i> Nothing."

       </p>
       <p>

<b>Option 2:</b>

       </p>
       <p>

For consistency, replace all occurrences of the empty exception
specification with a "<i>Throws:</i> Nothing." clause.

       </p>
   



<hr>
<h3><a name="879"></a>879. Atomic load const qualification</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alexander Chemeris <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-24 <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">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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>atomic_address</tt> type and <tt>atomic&lt;T*&gt;</tt> specialization provide atomic
updates to pointers.  However, the current specification requires
that the types pointer be to non-const objects.  This restriction
is unnecessary and unintended.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to review.  Lawrence will first check with Peter whether the
current examples are sufficient, or whether they need to be expanded to
include all cases.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Lawrence will handle all issues relating to atomics in a single paper.
</p>
<p>
LWG will defer discussion on atomics until that paper appears.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-17 Handled by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2925.html">N2925</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add const qualification to the pointer values of the <tt>atomic_address</tt>
and <tt>atomic&lt;T*&gt;</tt> specializations.  E.g.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>typedef struct atomic_address {
   void store(<ins>const</ins> void*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;
   void* exchange( <ins>const</ins> void*, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;
   bool compare_exchange( <ins>const</ins> void*&amp;, <ins>const</ins> void*,
                          memory_order, memory_order) volatile;
   bool compare_exchange( <ins>const</ins> void*&amp;, <ins>const</ins> void*,
                          memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst ) volatile;
   void* operator=(<ins>const</ins> void*) volatile;
} atomic_address;

void atomic_store(volatile atomic_address*, <ins>const</ins> void*);
void atomic_store_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, <ins>const</ins> void*,
                          memory_order);
void* atomic_exchange(volatile atomic_address*<ins>, const void*</ins>);
void* atomic_exchange_explicit(volatile atomic_address*, <ins>const</ins> void*,
                              memory_order);
bool atomic_compare_exchange(volatile atomic_address*,
                            <ins>const</ins> void**, <ins>const</ins> void*);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_explicit(volatile atomic_address*,
                                     <ins>const</ins> void**, <ins>const</ins> void*,
                                     memory_order, memory_order);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="880"></a>880. Missing atomic exchange parameter</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <b>Opened:</b> 2008-08-24 <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">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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#942">942</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>atomic_exchange</tt> and <tt>atomic_exchange_explicit</tt> functions seem to
be inconsistently missing parameters.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Lawrence: Need to write up a list for Pete with details.
</p>
<p>
Detlef: Should not be New, we already talked about in Concurrency group.
</p>
<p>
Recommend Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Lawrence will handle all issues relating to atomics in a single paper.
</p>
<p>
LWG will defer discussion on atomics until that paper appears.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-17 Handled by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2925.html">N2925</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the appropriate parameters.  For example,
</p>

<blockquote><pre>bool atomic_exchange(volatile atomic_bool*<ins>, bool</ins>);
bool atomic_exchange_explicit(volatile atomic_bool*, bool<ins>, memory_order</ins>);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="887"></a>887. issue with condition::wait_...</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The Posix/C++ working group has identified an inconsistency between
Posix and the C++ working draft in that Posix requires the clock to be
identified at creation, whereas C++ permits identifying the clock at the
call to wait.  The latter cannot be implemented with the former.
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Howard recommends NAD with the following explanation:
</p>

<p>
The intent of the current wording is for the <tt>condtion_variable::wait_until</tt>
be able to handle user-defined clocks as well as clocks the system knows about.
This can be done by providing overloads for the known clocks, and another
overload for unknown clocks which synchs to a known clock before waiting.
For example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Duration&gt;
bool
condition_variable::wait_until(unique_lock&lt;mutex&gt;&amp; lock,
                               const chrono::time_point&lt;chrono::system_clock, Duration&gt;&amp; abs_time)
{
    using namespace chrono;
    nanoseconds d = __round_up&lt;nanoseconds&gt;(abs_time.time_since_epoch());
    __do_timed_wait(lock.mutex()-&gt;native_handle(), time_point&lt;system_clock, nanoseconds&gt;(d));
    return system_clock::now() &lt; abs_time;
}

template &lt;class Clock, class Duration&gt;
bool
condition_variable::wait_until(unique_lock&lt;mutex&gt;&amp; lock,
                               const chrono::time_point&lt;Clock, Duration&gt;&amp; abs_time)
{
    using namespace chrono;
    system_clock::time_point    s_entry = system_clock::now();
    typename Clock::time_point  c_entry = Clock::now();
    nanoseconds dn = __round_up&lt;nanoseconds&gt;(abs_time.time_since_epoch() -
                                              c_entry.time_since_epoch());
    __do_timed_wait(lock.mutex()-&gt;native_handle(), s_entry + dn);
    return Clock::now() &lt; abs_time;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
In the above example, <tt>system_clock</tt> is the only clock which the underlying
condition variable knows how to deal with.  One overload just passes that clock
through.  The second overload (approximately) converts the unknown clock into
a <tt>system_clock  time_point</tt> prior to passing it down to the native
condition variable.
</p>

<p>
On Posix systems vendors are free to add implementation defined constructors which
take a clock.  That clock can be stored in the condition_variable, and converted
to (or not as necessary) as shown above.
</p>

<p>
If an implementation defined constructor takes a clock (for example), then part
of the semantics for that implementation defined ctor might include that a
<tt>wait_until</tt> using a clock other than the one constructed with results
in an error (exceptional condition) instead of a conversion to the stored clock.
Such a design is up to the vendor as once an implementation defined ctor is used,
the vendor is free to specifiy the behavior of waits and/or notifies however
he pleases (when the cv is constructed in an implementation defined manner).
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
"POSIX people will review the proposed NAD resolution at their upcoming NY
meeting.
</p>

<p>
See the minutes at: <a href="http://wiki.dinkumware.com/twiki/bin/view/Posix/POSIX-CppBindingWorkingGroupNewYork2009">http://wiki.dinkumware.com/twiki/bin/view/Posix/POSIX-CppBindingWorkingGroupNewYork2009</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-18 Detlef reopens the issue:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
On Friday afternoon in Frankfurt is was decided that 887 is NAD.
This decision was mainly based on a sample implementation presented
by Howard that implemented one clock on top of another.
Unfortunately this implementation doesn't work for the probably most
important case where a system has a monotonic clock and a real-time
clock (or "wall time" clock):
</p>
<p>
If the underlying "system_clock" is a monotonic clock, and
the program waits on the real-time clock, and the real-time clock
is set forward, the wait will unblock too late.
</p>

<p>
If the underlying "system_clock" is a real-time clock, and the
program waits on the monotonic clock, and the real-time clock
is set back, the wait again will unblock too late.
</p>

<p>
Sorry that I didn't remember this on Friday, but it was Friday
afternoon after a busy week...
</p>

<p>
So as the decision was made on a wrong asumption, I propose to re-open
the issue.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-26 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Detlef correctly argues that <tt>condition_variable::wait_until</tt> could
return "too late" in the context of clocks being adjusted during the wait.  I agree
with his logic.  But I disagree that this makes this interface unimplementable
on POSIX.
</p>

<p>
The POSIX spec also does not guarantee that <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt> does
not return "too late" when clocks are readjusted during the wait.  Indeed, the
POSIX specification lacks any requirements at all concerning how soon
<tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt> returns after a time out.  This is evidently a
QOI issue by the POSIX standard.  Here is a quote of the most relevant normative
text concerning <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt> found
<a href="http://www.unix.org/single_unix_specification/">here</a>.
</p>

<blockquote>
The <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait()</tt> function shall be equivalent to
<tt>pthread_cond_wait()</tt>, except that an error is returned if the absolute
time specified by <tt>abstime</tt> passes (that is, system time equals or exceeds
<tt>abstime</tt>) before the condition <tt>cond</tt> is signaled or broadcasted, or if the
absolute time specified by <tt>abstime</tt> has already been passed at the time
of the call.
</blockquote>

<p>
I.e. the POSIX specification speaks of the error code returned in case of a time
out, but not on the timeliness of that return.
</p>

<p>
Might this simply be an oversight, or minor defect in the POSIX specification?
</p>

<p>
I do not believe so.  This same section goes on to say in <em>non-normative</em>
text:
</p>

<blockquote>
For cases when the system clock is advanced discontinuously by an
operator, it is expected that implementations process any timed wait
expiring at an intervening time as if that time had actually occurred.
</blockquote>

<p>
Here is non-normative wording encouraging the implementation to ignore an advancing
underlying clock and subsequently causing an early (spurious) return.  There is
no wording at all which addresses Detlef's example of a "late return".  With
<tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt> this would be caused by setting the system clock
backwards.  It seems reasonable to assume, based on the wording that is already
in the POSIX spec, that again, the discontinuously changed clock would be ignored
by <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt>. 
</p>

<p>
A noteworthy difference between <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt> and
<tt>condition_variable::wait_until</tt> is that the POSIX spec appears to
say that <tt>ETIMEDOUT</tt> should be returned if <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt>
returns because of timeout signal, whether or not the system clock was discontinuously
advanced during the wait.  In contrast <tt>condition_variable::wait_until</tt>
always returns:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><tt>Clock::now() &lt; abs_time</tt>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
That is, the C++ spec requires that the clock be rechecked (detecting discontinuous
adjustments during the wait) at the time of return.  <tt>condition_variable::wait_until</tt>
may indeed return early or late.  But regardless it will return a value
reflecting timeout status at the time of return (even if clocks have been adjusted).
Of course the clock may be adjusted after the return value is computed but before the client has
a chance to read the result of the return.  Thus there are no iron-clad guarantees
here.
</p>

<p>
<tt>condition_variable::wait_until</tt> (and <tt>pthread_cond_timedwait</tt>)
is little more than a convenience function for making sure
<tt>condition_variable::wait</tt> doesn't hang for an unreasonable amount of
time (where the client gets to define "unreasonable").  I do not think it
is in anyone's interest to try to make it into anything more than that.
</p>

<p>
I maintain that this is a useful and flexible specification in the spirit of
C++, and is implementable on POSIX.  The implementation technique described above
is a reasonable approach.  There may also be higher quality approaches.  This
specification, like the POSIX specification, gives a wide latitude for QOI.
</p>

<p>
I continue to recommend NAD, but would not object to a clarifying note regarding
the behavior of <tt>condition_variable::wait_until</tt>.  At the moment, I do
not have good wording for such a note, but welcome suggestions.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-09-30: See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2969.html">N2969</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The LWG is in favor of Detlef to supply revision which adopts Option 2 from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2969.html">N2969</a>
but is modified by saying that <tt>system_clock</tt> must be available for <tt>wait_until</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-02-11 Anthony provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-02-22 Anthony adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I am strongly against
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2999.html">N2999</a>.
</p>

<p>
Firstly, I think that the most appropriate use of a timed wait on a condition
variable is with a monotonic clock, so it ought to be guaranteed to be available
on systems that support such a clock. Also, making the set of supported clocks
implementation defined essentially kills portability around the use of
user-defined clocks.
</p>

<p>
I also think that <tt>wait_for</tt> is potentially useful, and trivially
implementable given a working templated <tt>wait_until</tt> and a monotonic
clock.
</p>

<p>
I also disagree with many of Detlef's points in the rationale. In a system with
hard latency limits there is likely to be a monotonic clock, otherwise you have
no way of measuring against these latency limits since the <tt>system_clock</tt>
may change arbitrarily. In such systems, you <em>want</em> to be able to use
<tt>wait_for</tt>, or <tt>wait_until</tt> with a monotonic clock.
</p>

<p>
I disagree that the <tt>wait_*</tt> functions cannot be implemented correctly on
top of POSIX: I have done so. The only guarantee in the working draft is that
when the function returns certain properties are true; there is no guarantee
that the function will return <em>immediately</em> that the properties are true.
My resolution to issue 887 makes this clear. How small the latency is is QoI.
</p>

<p>
On systems without a monotonic clock, you cannot measure the problem since the
system clock can change arbitrarily so any timing calculations you make may be
wrong due to clock changes.
</p>

<p>
On systems with a monotonic clock, you can choose to use it for your condition
variables. If you are waiting against a <tt>system_clock::time_point</tt> then
you can check the clock when waking, and either return as a timeout or spurious
wake depending on whether <tt>system_clock::now()</tt> is before or after the
specified <tt>time_point</tt>.
</p>

<p>
Windows <em>does</em> provide condition variables from Vista onwards. I choose
not to use them, but they are there. If people are concerned about
implementation difficulty, the Boost implementation can be used for most
purposes; the Boost license is pretty liberal in that regard.
</p>

<p>
My preferred resolution to issue 887 is currently the PR in the issues list.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
There is no consensus for moving the related paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2999.html">N2999</a>
into the WP.
</p>
<p>
There was support for moving this issue as proposed to Ready, but the support
was insufficient to call a consensus.
</p>
<p>
There was consensus for moving this issue to NAD as opposed to leaving it open.
Rationale added.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The standard as written is sufficiently implementable and self consistent.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a new paragraph after 30.2.4 [thread.req.timing]p3:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
3 The resolution of timing provided by an implementation depends on both
operating system and hardware. The finest resolution provided by an
implementation is called the <i>native resolution</i>.
</p>

<p><ins>
If a function in this clause takes a timeout argument, and the time point or
elapsed time specified passes before the function returns, the latency between
the timeout occurring and the function returning is unspecified [<i>Note:</i>
Implementations should strive to keep such latency as small as possible, but
portable code should not rely on any specific upper limits � <i>end
note</i>]
</ins></p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="889"></a>889. thread::id comparisons</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Lawrence Crowl <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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 324</b></p>

<p>
The <tt>thread::id</tt> type supports the full set of comparison operators.  This
is substantially more than is required for the associative containers that
justified them.  Please place an issue against the threads library.
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Would depend on proposed extension to POSIX, or non-standard extension.
What about hash? POSIX discussing op. POSIX not known to be considering
support needed for hash, op.
</p>
<p>
Group expresses support for putting ids in both unordered and ordered containers.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
post San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Howard:  It turns out the current working paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>
<i>already has</i> <tt>hash&lt;thread::id&gt;</tt>
(20.8 [function.objects], 20.8.15 [unord.hash]).  We simply
overlooked it in the meeting.  It is a good thing we voted in favor of it
(again). :-)
</p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend to close as NAD. For POSIX, see if we need to add a function to
convert <tt>pthread_t</tt> to integer.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The recommendation for LWG-889/UK-324 is NAD, already specified.
</p>
<p>
It is not clear to me that the specification is complete.
</p>
<p>
In particular, the synopsis of <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> in 20.8 [function.objects] does not mention <tt>hash&lt; thread::id
&gt;</tt> nor <tt>hash&lt; error_code &gt;</tt>, although their
existence is implied by 20.8.15 [unord.hash], p1.
</p>
<p>
I am fairly uncomfortable putting the declaration for the
<tt>thread_id</tt> specialization into <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> as
<tt>id</tt> is a nested class inside <tt>std::thread</tt>, so it implies
that <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> would require the definition of the
<tt>thread</tt> class template in order to forward declared
<tt>thread::id</tt> and form this specialization.
</p>
<p>
It seems better to me that the dependency goes the other way around
(<tt>&lt;thread&gt;</tt> will more typically make use of
<tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> than vice-versa) and the
<tt>hash&lt;thread::id&gt;</tt> specialization be declared in the
<tt>&lt;thread&gt;</tt> header.
</p>
<p>
I think <tt>hash&lt;error_code&gt;</tt> could go into either
<tt>&lt;system_error&gt;</tt> or <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> and have no
immediate preference either way.  However, it should clearly appear in
the synopsis of one of these two.
</p>
<p>
Recommend moving 889 back to open, and tying in a reference to UK-324.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Howard observes that <tt>thread::id</tt> need not be a nested class;
it could be a <tt>typedef</tt> for a more visible type.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-24 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
I do not believe this is correct.  <tt>thread::id</tt> is explicitly documents as a
nested class, rather than as an unspecified typedef analogous to an
iterator.  If the intent is that this is not implemented as a nested class
(under the as-if freedoms) then this is a novel form of standardese.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Decided we want to move hash specialization for thread_id to the thread
header. Alisdair to provide wording.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-28 Alisdair provided wording, moved to Review.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Add a strike for <tt>hash&lt;thread::id&gt;</tt>. Move to Ready
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-13 The proposed wording of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a> is a superset of the
wording in this issue.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-02-09 Moved from Ready to Open:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a> is not quite a superset of this issue and it is controversial
whether or not the note:
</p>

<blockquote>
hash template specialization allows <tt>thread::id</tt> objects to be used as keys in
unordered containers.
</blockquote>

<p>
should be added to the WP.
</p>


</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-02-09 Objections to moving this to NAD Editorial, solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a> have been removed.  Set to Tentatively NAD Editorial.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1182">1182</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Remove the following prototype from the synopsis in
20.8 [function.objects]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>
template &lt;&gt; struct hash&lt;std::thread::id&gt;;
</del></pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add to 30.3 [thread.threads], p1 Header <tt>&lt;thread&gt;</tt> synopsis:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>template &lt;class T&gt; struct hash;
template &lt;&gt; struct hash&lt;thread::id&gt;;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add template specialization below class definition in 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id]
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>template &lt;&gt;
struct hash&lt;thread::id&gt; : public unary_function&lt;thread::id, size_t&gt; {
   size_t operator()(thread::id val) const;
};</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Extend note in p2 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id] with second sentence:
</p>

<blockquote>
[<i>Note:</i> Relational operators allow <tt>thread::id</tt> objects to be used
as keys in associative containers.
<ins><tt>hash</tt> template specialization allows <tt>thread::id</tt> objects to be used as keys
in unordered containers.</ins>
� <i>end note</i>]
</blockquote>

<p>
Add new paragraph to end of 30.3.1.1 [thread.thread.id]
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>template &lt;&gt; struct hash&lt;thread::id&gt;;</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>.
</ins></blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="892"></a>892. Forward_list issues...</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ed Smith-Rowland <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I was looking at the latest draft on <tt>forward_list</tt>.  Especially the splice methods.
</p>
<p>
The first one splices a whole list after a given iterator in <tt>this</tt>.  The name is <tt>splice_after</tt>.
I think in 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops] paragraph 40
change:
</p>
<blockquote>
<i>Effect:</i> Insert the contents of <tt>x</tt> <del>before</del> <ins>after</ins> <tt>position</tt>, ...
</blockquote>

<p>
A deeper issue involves the complexity.  <tt>forward_list</tt> has no <tt>size</tt> and we
don't know when we've reached the end except to walk up to it.  To
splice we would need to hook the end of the source list to the item
after <tt>position</tt> in this list.  This would involve walking length of the
source list until we got to the last dereference-able element in source.
There's no way we could do this in O(1) unless we stored a bogus end in
<tt>forward_list</tt>.
</p>
<p>
OTOH, the last version of <tt>splice_after</tt> with iterator ranges we could do
in O(1) because we know how to hook the end of the source range to ...
</p>
<p>
Unless I'm misconceiving the whole thing.  Which is possible.  I'll look at it again.
</p>
<p>
I'm pretty sure about the first part though.
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This issue is more complicated than it looks.
</p>
<p>
paragraph 47: replace each <tt>(first, last) with (first, last]</tt>
</p>
<p>
add a statement after paragraph 48 that complexity is O(1)
</p>
<p>
remove the complexity statement from the first overload of splice_after
</p>
<p>
We may have the same problems with other modifiers, like erase_after.
Should it require that all iterators in the range (position, last] be
dereferenceable?
</p>
<p>
We do, however, like the proposed changes and consider them Editorial.
Move to NAD Editorial, Pending. Howard to open a new issue to handle the
problems with the complexity requirements.
</p>
<p>
Opened <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#897">897</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops] paragraph 40
change:
</p>
<blockquote>
<i>Effect:</i> Insert the contents of <tt>x</tt> <del>before</del> <ins>after</ins> <tt>position</tt>, ...
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="895"></a>895. "Requires:" on std::string::at et al</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> James Dennett <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#625">625</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Per discussion, we need an issue open to cover looking at "Requires"
clauses which are not constraints on user code, such as that on
<tt>std::basic_string::at</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
 Alan to address in paper.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="897"></a>897. Forward_list issues... Part 2</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-22 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
This issue was split off from <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#892">892</a> at the request of the LWG.
</p>

<p><i>[
San Francisco:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This issue is more complicated than it looks.
</p>
<p>
paragraph 47: replace each <tt>(first, last) with (first, last]</tt>
</p>
<p>
add a statement after paragraph 48 that complexity is O(1)
</p>
<p>
remove the complexity statement from the first overload of splice_after
</p>
<p>
We may have the same problems with other modifiers, like erase_after.
Should it require that all iterators in the range (position, last] be
dereferenceable?
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
There are actually 3 issues here:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
What value should <tt>erase_after</tt> return?  With <tt>list</tt>, code often
looks like:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>for (auto i = l.begin(); i != l.end();)
{
    // inspect *i and decide if you want to erase it
    // ...
    if (I want to erase *i)
        i = l.erase(i);
    else
        ++i;
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
I.e. the iterator returned from <tt>erase</tt> is useful for setting up the
logic for operating on the next element.  For <tt>forward_list</tt> this might
look something like:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>auto i = fl.before_begin();
auto ip1 = i;
for (++ip1; ip1 != fl.end(); ++ip1)
{
    // inspect *(i+1) and decide if you want to erase it
    // ...
    if (I want to erase *(i+1))
        i = fl.erase_after(i);
    else
        ++i;
    ip1 = i;
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
In the above example code, it is convenient if <tt>erase_after</tt> returns
the element <i>prior</i> to the erased element (range) instead of the element
<i>after</i> the erase element (range).
</p>
<p>
Existing practice:
</p>
<ul>
<li>SGI slist returns an iterator referencing the element <i>after</i> the erased range.</li>
<li>CodeWarrior slist returns an iterator referencing the element <i>before</i> the erased range.</li>
</ul>
<p>
There is not a strong technical argument for either solution over the other.
</p>
</li>

<li>
<p>
With all other containers, operations always work on the range
<tt>[first, last)</tt> and/or <i>prior to</i> the given <tt>position</tt>.
</p>
<p>
With <tt>forward_list</tt>, operations sometimes work on the range
<tt>(first, last]</tt> and/or <i>after</i> the given <tt>position</tt>.
</p>
<p>
This is simply due to the fact that in order to operate on
<tt>*first</tt> (with <tt>forward_list</tt>) one needs access to
<tt>*(first-1)</tt>.  And that's not practical with
<tt>forward_list</tt>.  So the operating range needs to start with <tt>(first</tt>,
not <tt>[first</tt> (as the current working paper says). 
</p>
<p>
Additionally, if one is interested in  splicing the range <tt>(first, last)</tt>,
then (with <tt>forward_list</tt>), one needs practical (constant time) access to
<tt>*(last-1)</tt> so that one can set the <i>next</i> field in this node to
the proper value.  As this is not possible with <tt>forward_list</tt>, one must
specify the last element of interest instead of one past the last element of
interest.  The syntax for doing this is to pass <tt>(first, last]</tt> instead
of <tt>(first, last)</tt>.
</p>
<p>
With <tt>erase_after</tt> we have a choice of either erasing the range
<tt>(first, last]</tt> <em>or</em> <tt>(first, last)</tt>.  Choosing the latter
enables:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>x.erase_after(pos, x.end());
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
With the former, the above statement is inconvenient or expensive due to the lack
of constant time access to <tt>x.end()-1</tt>.  However we could introduce:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase_to_end(const_iterator position);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
to compensate.
</p>

<p>
The advantage of the former (<tt>(first, last]</tt>) for <tt>erase_after</tt>
is a consistency with <tt>splice_after</tt> which uses <tt>(first, last]</tt>
as the specified range.  But this either requires the addition of <tt>erase_to_end</tt>
or giving up such functionality.
</p>

</li>

<li>
As stated in the discussion of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#892">892</a>, and reienforced by point 2 above,
a <tt>splice_after</tt> should work on the source range <tt>(first, last]</tt>
if the operation is to be <i>&#927;</i>(1).  When splicing an entire list <tt>x</tt> the
algorithm needs <tt>(x.before_begin(), x.end()-1]</tt>.  Unfortunately <tt>x.end()-1</tt>
is not available in constant time unless we specify that it must be.  In order to
make <tt>x.end()-1</tt> available in constant time, the implementation would have
to dedicate a pointer to it.  I believe the design of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2543.htm">N2543</a>
intended a nominal overhead of <tt>foward_list</tt> of 1 pointer.  Thus splicing
one <i>entire</i> <tt>forward_list</tt> into another can not be <i>&#927;</i>(1).
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We may need a new issue to correct splice_after, because it may no
longer be correct to accept an rvalues as an argument. Merge may be
affected, too. This might be issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1133">1133</a>. (Howard: confirmed)
</p>
<p>
Move this to Ready, but the Requires clause of the second form of
splice_after should say "(first, last)," not "(first, last]" (there are
three occurrences). There was considerable discussion on this. (Howard: fixed)
</p>
<p>
Alan suggested removing the "foward_last&lt;T. Alloc&gt;&amp;&amp; x"
parameter from the second form of splice_after, because it is redundant.
PJP wanted to keep it, because it allows him to check for bad ranges
(i.e. "Granny knots").
</p>
<p>
We prefer to keep <tt>x</tt>.
</p>
<p>
Beman. Whenever we deviate from the customary half-open range in the
specification, we should add a non-normative comment to the standard
explaining the deviation. This clarifies the intention and spares the
committee much confusion in the future.
</p>
<p>
Alan to write a non-normative comment to explain the use of fully-closed ranges.
</p>
<p>
Move to Ready, with the changes described above. (Howard: awaiting note from Alan)
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial, addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2988.pdf">N2988</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Wording below assumes issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#878">878</a> is accepted, but this issue is
independent of that issue.
</p>

<p>
Change 23.3.3.4 [forwardlist.modifiers]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>iterator erase_after(const_iterator position);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> The iterator following <tt>position</tt> is dereferenceable.
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Erases the element pointed to by the iterator following <tt>position</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <del>An iterator pointing to the element following the one that was erased, or <tt>end()</tt> if no such 
element exists</del>
<ins>An iterator equal to <tt>position</tt></ins>.
</p>
</blockquote>


<pre>iterator erase_after(const_iterator position, <ins>const_</ins>iterator last);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> All iterators in the range
<tt><del>[</del><ins>(</ins>position,last)</tt>
are dereferenceable.
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Erases the elements in the range
<tt><del>[</del><ins>(</ins>position,last)</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i>  <ins>An iterator equal to <tt>position</tt></ins> <del><tt>last</tt></del>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>void splice_after(const_iterator position, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>position</tt> is <tt>before_begin()</tt> or a
dereferenceable iterator in the range <tt>[begin(), end))</tt>. <tt>&amp;x != this</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Inserts the contents of <tt>x</tt> after <tt>position</tt>, and
<tt>x</tt> becomes empty. 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>. 
</p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing. 
</p>
<p>
<i>Complexity:</i> <del><i>&#927;</i>(1)</del> <ins><i>&#927;</i>(<tt>distance(x.begin(), x.end())</tt>)</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>...</p>

<pre>void splice_after(const_iterator position, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, 
                  const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>position</tt> is <tt>before_begin()</tt> or a
dereferenceable iterator in the range <tt>[begin(), end))</tt>.
<tt>(first,last)</tt> is a valid range in
<tt>x</tt>, and all iterators in the range
<tt>(first,last)</tt> are dereferenceable.
<tt>position</tt> is not an iterator in the range <tt>(first,last)</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Inserts elements in the range <tt>(first,last)</tt>
after <tt>position</tt> and removes the elements from <tt>x</tt>.
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>.
</p>
<p>
<ins><i>Complexity:</i> <i>&#927;</i>(1).</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="901"></a>901. insert iterators can move from lvalues</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2.5 [insert.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-24 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 282</b></p>

<p>
The requires clause on the <tt>const T &amp;</tt> overloads in
<tt>back_insert_iterator/front_insert_iterator/insert_iterator</tt> mean that the
assignment operator will implicitly move from lvalues of a move-only type.
</p>
<p>
Suggested resolutions are:
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
Add another overload with a negative constraint on copy-constructible
and flag it "= delete".
</li>
<li>
Drop the copy-constructible overload entirely and rely on perfect
forwarding to catch move issues one level deeper.
</li>
<li>
This is a fundamental problem in move-syntax that relies on the
presence of two overloads, and we need to look more deeply into this
area as a whole - do not solve this issue in isolation.
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Both comment and issue have been resolved by the adoption of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a>
(rvalue references safety fix) at the last meeting.
</p>

<p>
Suggest resolve as NAD Editorial with a reference to the paper.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree that this has been resolved in the latest Working Draft.
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD, addressed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="902"></a>902. Regular is the wrong concept to constrain numeric_limits</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-24 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses FR 32 and DE 16</b></p>

<p>
<tt>numeric_limits</tt> has functions specifically designed to return NaNs, which
break the model of <tt>Regular</tt> (via its axioms.)  While floating point types
will be acceptible in many algorithms taking <tt>Regular</tt> values, it is not
appopriate for this specific API and we need a less refined constraint.
</p>

<p>FR 32:</p>

<blockquote>
The definition of <tt>numeric_limits&lt;&gt;</tt> as requiring a regular
type is both conceptually wrong and operationally illogical. As we
pointed before, this mistake needs to be corrected. For example, the
template can be left unconstrained. In fact this reflects a much more
general problem with concept_maps/axioms and their interpretations. It
appears that the current text heavily leans toward experimental academic
type theory.
</blockquote>

<p>DE 16:</p>

<blockquote>
The class template <tt>numeric_limits</tt> should not specify the Regular concept
requirement for its template parameter, because it contains functions
returning NaN values for floating-point types; these values violate the
semantics of EqualityComparable.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Open.  Alisdair and Gaby will work on a solution, along with the new
treatment of axioms in clause 14.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="903"></a>903. <tt>back_insert_iterator</tt> issue</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2.1 [back.insert.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-19 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I just noticed this; don't know how far the problem(?) extends or
whether it's new or existing: <tt>back_insert_iterator</tt>'s <tt>operator*</tt> is not
<tt>const</tt>, so you can't dereference a <tt>const</tt> one.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
If done, this change should be applied for <tt>front_insert_iterator</tt>,
<tt>insert_iterator</tt>, <tt>ostream_iterator</tt>, and <tt>ostreambuf_iterator</tt> as well.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair notes that these all are output iterators.
Howard points out that <tt>++*i</tt>
would no longer work if we made this change.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-25 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<ol>
<li>
If <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1009">1009</a> is accepted, <tt>OutputIterator</tt> does no longer support post increment.
</li>
<li>
To support backward compatibility a second overload of <tt>operator*</tt>
can be added.
Note that the <tt>HasDereference</tt> concept (and the <tt>HasDereference</tt> part of concept
<tt>Iterator</tt>) was specifically refactored to cope with optional const
qualification and
to properly reflect the dual nature of built-in <tt>operator*</tt> as of
13.5.8 [over.literal]/6.
</li>
</ol>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="905"></a>905. Mutex specification questions</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
A few questions on the current WP,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>:
</p>
<p>
30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements]/24 says an expression
<tt>mut.unlock()</tt> "Throws: Nothing." I'm assuming that, per 17.6.3.11 [res.on.required], errors that violate the precondition "The
calling thread shall own the mutex" opens the door for throwing an
exception anyway, such as to report unbalanced unlock operations and
unlocking from a thread that does not have ownership. Right?
</p>
<p>
30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class]/3 (actually numbered paragraph "27"
in the WP; this is just a typo I think) says
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
The behavior of a program is undefined if:
</p>
<ul>
<li>it destroys a <tt>mutex</tt> object owned by any thread,</li>
<li>a thread that owns a <tt>mutex</tt> object calls <tt>lock()</tt> or <tt>try_lock()</tt> on that object, or</li>
<li>a thread terminates while owning a <tt>mutex</tt> object.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>

<p>
As already discussed, I think the second bullet should be removed, and
such a <tt>lock()</tt> or <tt>try_lock()</tt> should fail with an
exception or returning <tt>false</tt>, respectively.
</p>
<p>
A potential addition to the list would be
</p>
<ul>
<li>a thread unlocks a <tt>mutex</tt> it does not have ownership of.</li>
</ul>
<p>
but without that the status quo text endorses the technique of the
program logically transferring ownership of a mutex to another thread
with correctness enforced by programming discipline. Was that intended?
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Two resolutions: "not a defect" and "duplicate", as follows:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements]/24: NAD. If the precondition
fails the program has undefined behaviour and therefore an
implementation may throw an exception already.
</li>
<li>
30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class]/3 bullet 2: Already addressed by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#893">893</a>.
</li>
<li>
30.4.1.2.1 [thread.mutex.class]/3 proposed addition: NAD. This is
already covered by the mutex requirements, which have ownership as a
Precondition.
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="906"></a>906. <tt>ObjectType</tt> is the wrong concept to constrain <tt>initializer_list</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.9 [support.initlist] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-09-26 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The currently proposed constraint on <tt>initializer_list</tt>'s element type
<tt>E</tt> is that is has to meet <tt>ObjectType</tt>. This is an underspecification,
because both core language and library part of <tt>initializer_list</tt>
make clear, that it references an implicitly allocated array:
</p>
<p>
8.5.4 [dcl.init.list]/4:
</p>
<blockquote>
When an initializer list is implicitly converted to a
<tt>std::initializer_list&lt;E&gt;</tt>, the object passed is constructed as if the
implementation allocated an array of N elements of type <tt>E</tt>, where
N is the number of elements in the initializer list.[..]
</blockquote>

<p>
18.9 [support.initlist]/2.
</p>

<blockquote>
An object of type <tt>initializer_list&lt;E&gt;</tt> provides access to an array of
objects of type <tt>const E</tt>.[..]
</blockquote>

<p>
Therefore, <tt>E</tt> needs to fulfill concept <tt>ValueType</tt> (thus excluding
abstract class types). This stricter requirement should be added
to prevent deep instantiation errors known from the bad old times,
as shown in the following example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// Header A: (Should concept-check even in stand-alone modus)

template &lt;DefaultConstructible T&gt;
requires MoveConstructible&lt;T&gt;
void generate_and_do_3(T a) {
  std::initializer_list&lt;T&gt; list{T(), std::move(a), T()};
  ...
}

void do_more();
void do_more_or_less();

template &lt;DefaultConstructible T&gt;
requires MoveConstructible&lt;T&gt;
void more_generate_3() {
  do_more();
  generate_and_do_3(T());
}

template &lt;DefaultConstructible T&gt;
requires MoveConstructible&lt;T&gt;
void something_and_generate_3() {
  do_more_or_less();
  more_generate_3();
}

// Test.cpp

#include "A.h"

class Abstract {
public:
  virtual ~Abstract();
  virtual void foo() = 0; // abstract type
  Abstract(Abstract&amp;&amp;){} // MoveConstructible
  Abstract(){} // DefaultConstructible
};

int main() {
  // The restricted template *accepts* the argument, but
  // causes a deep instantiation error in the internal function
  // generate_and_do_3:
  something_and_generate_3&lt;Abstract&gt;();
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The proposed stricter constraint does not minimize the aim to
support more general containers for which <tt>ObjectType</tt> would be
sufficient. If such an extended container (lets assume it's still a
class template) provides a constructor that accepts an <tt>initializer_list</tt>
only <em>this</em> constructor would need to be restricted on <tt>ValueType</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ObjectType T&gt;
class ExtContainer {
public:
  requires ValueType&lt;T&gt;
  ExtContainer(std::initializer_list&lt;T&gt;);
  ...
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Tentatively Ready.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Need to look at again without concepts.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
In 18.9 [support.initlist]/p.1 replace in "header <tt>&lt;initializer_list&gt;</tt> synopsis"
the constraint "<tt>ObjectType</tt>" in the template parameter list by the
constraint "<tt>ValueType</tt>".
</li>
</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="908"></a>908. Deleted assignment operators for atomic types must be volatile</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 90</b></p>

<p>
The deleted copy-assignment operators for the atomic types are not
marked as volatile in N2723, whereas the assignment operators from the
associated non-atomic types are. e.g.
</p>
<blockquote><pre>atomic_bool&amp; operator=(atomic_bool const&amp;) = delete;
atomic_bool&amp; operator=(bool) volatile;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This leads to ambiguity when assigning a non-atomic value to a
non-volatile instance of an atomic type:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>atomic_bool b;
b=false;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Both assignment operators require a standard conversions: the
copy-assignment operator can use the implicit <tt>atomic_bool(bool)</tt>
conversion constructor to convert <tt>false</tt> to an instance of
<tt>atomic_bool</tt>, or <tt>b</tt> can undergo a qualification conversion in order to
use the assignment from a plain <tt>bool</tt>.
</p>

<p>
This is only a problem once issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#845">845</a> is applied.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to open. Assign to Lawrence. Related to US 90 comment.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-17 Handled by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2925.html">N2925</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add volatile qualification to the deleted copy-assignment operator of
all the atomic types:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>atomic_bool&amp; operator=(atomic_bool const&amp;) <ins>volatile</ins> = delete;
atomic_itype&amp; operator=(atomic_itype const&amp;) <ins>volatile</ins> = delete;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
etc.
</p>
<p>
This will mean that the deleted copy-assignment operator will require
<i>two</i> conversions in the above example, and thus be a worse match than
the assignment from plain <tt>bool</tt>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="910"></a>910. Effects of MoveAssignable</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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 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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 150</b></p>

<p>
The description of the effect of <tt>operator=</tt> in the <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>
concept, given in paragraph 7 is:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>result_type  T::operator=(T&amp;&amp;  rv);  // inherited from HasAssign&lt;T, T&amp;&amp;&gt;
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Postconditions:</i> the constructed <tt>T</tt> object is equivalent to the value of
<tt>rv</tt> before the assignment. [<i>Note:</i> there is no
requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the assignment.  <i>--end note</i>]
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
The sentence contains a typo (what is the "constructed <tt>T</tt> object"?)
probably due to a cut&amp;paste from <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>. Moreover, the
discussion of LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#675">675</a> shows that the postcondition is too generic
and might not reflect the user expectations. An implementation of the
move assignment that just calls <tt>swap()</tt> would always fulfill the
postcondition as stated, but might have surprising side-effects in case
the source rvalue refers to an object that is not going to be
immediately destroyed. See LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#900">900</a> for another example. Due to
the sometimes intangible nature of the "user expectation", it seems
difficult to have precise normative wording that could cover all cases
without introducing unnecessary restrictions. However a non-normative
clarification could be a very helpful warning sign that swapping is not
always the correct thing to do.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-09 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Issue 910 is exactly the reason BSI advanced the Editorial comment UK-150.
</p>
<p>
The post-conditions after assignment are at a minimum that the object
referenced by rv must be safely destructible, and the transaction should not
leak resources.  Ideally it should be possible to simply assign rv a new
valid state after the call without invoking undefined behaviour, but any
other use of the referenced object would depend upon additional guarantees
made by that type.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-09 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The intent of the rvalue reference work is that the moved from <tt>rv</tt> is
a valid object.  Not one in a singular state.  If, for example, the moved from
object is a <tt>vector</tt>, one should be able to do anything on that moved-from
<tt>vector</tt> that you can do with any other <tt>vector</tt>.  However you would
first have to query it to find out what its current state is.  E.g. it might have <tt>capacity</tt>,
it might not.  It might have a non-zero <tt>size</tt>, it might not.  But regardless,
you can <tt>push_back</tt> on to it if you want.
</p>

<p>
That being said, most standard code is now conceptized.  That is, the concepts
list the only operations that can be done with templated types - whether or not
the values have been moved from.
</p>

<p>
Here is user-written code which must be allowed to be legal:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;vector&gt;
#include &lt;cstdio&gt;

template &lt;class Allocator&gt;
void
inspect(std::vector&lt;double, Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; v)
{
    std::vector&lt;double, Allocator&gt; result(move(v));
    std::printf("moved from vector has %u size and %u capacity\n", v.size(), v.capacity());
    std::printf("The contents of the vector are:\n");
    typedef typename std::vector&lt;double, Allocator&gt;::iterator I;
    for (I i = v.begin(), e = v.end(); i != e; ++i)
        printf("%f\n", *i);
}

int main()
{
    std::vector&lt;double&gt; v1(100, 5.5);
    inspect(move(v1));
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The above program does not treat the moved-from <tt>vector</tt> as singular.  It
only treats it as a <tt>vector</tt> with an unknown value.
</p>
<p>
I believe the current proposed wording is consistent with my view on this.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree that the proposed resolution
is an improvement over the current wording.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Need to look at again without concepts.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Walter will consult with Dave and Doug.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We believe this is handled by the resolution to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a>,
but there is to much going on in this area to be sure.  Defer for now.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-23 Moved to Tentatively NAD Concepts after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The current <tt>MoveAssignable</tt> requirements say everything that can be said
in general.  Each std-defined type has a more detailed specification of move
assignment.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In  [concept.copymove], replace the postcondition in paragraph 7 with:
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Postconditions:</i> <tt>*this</tt> is equivalent to the value of <tt>rv</tt> before the
assignment. [<i>Note:</i> there is no requirement on the value of <tt>rv</tt> after the
assignment, but the
effect should be unsurprising to the user even in case <tt>rv</tt> is not
immediately destroyed. This may require that resources previously owned
by <tt>*this</tt> are released instead of transferred to <tt>rv</tt>. <i>-- end note</i>]
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="912"></a>912. Array swap needs to be conceptualized</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-01 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
With the adaption of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#809">809</a>
we have a new algorithm <tt>swap</tt> for C-arrays, which needs to be conceptualized.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend as NAD Editorial: The changes have already been applied to the WP
<a href="" ref="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2800.pdf">N2800</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to NAD; the changes have already been made.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Replace in 25.3.3 [alg.swap] before p. 3 until p. 4 by
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> <ins>ValueType</ins> T, size_t N&gt;
<ins>requires Swappable&lt;T&gt;</ins>
void swap(T (&amp;a)[N], T (&amp;b)[N]);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<del><i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> shall be <tt>Swappable</tt>.</del>
</p>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> <tt>swap_ranges(a, a + N, b);</tt>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="913"></a>913. Superfluous requirements for replace algorithms</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-03 <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.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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
(A) 25.3.5 [alg.replace]/1:
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> The expression <tt>*first = new_value</tt> shall be valid.
</blockquote>

<p>
(B) 25.3.5 [alg.replace]/4:
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> The results of the expressions <tt>*first</tt> and <tt>new_value</tt> shall
be writable to the result output iterator.[..]
</blockquote>

<p>
Since conceptualization, the quoted content of these clauses is covered
by the existing requirements
</p>

<p>
(A) <tt>OutputIterator&lt;Iter, const T&amp;&gt;</tt>
</p>

<p>
and
</p>

<p>
(B) <tt>OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, InIter::reference&gt; &amp;&amp; OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, const T&amp;&gt;</tt>
</p>

<p>
resp, and thus should be removed.
</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>
<ol type="A">
<li>
<p>
Remove 25.3.5 [alg.replace]/1.
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, class T&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt;Iter, Iter::reference&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; OutputIterator&lt;Iter, const T&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; HasEqualTo&lt;Iter::value_type, T&gt; 
  void replace(Iter first, Iter last, 
               const T&amp; old_value, const T&amp; new_value); 

template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, Predicate&lt;auto, Iter::value_type&gt; Pred, class T&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt;Iter, Iter::reference&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; OutputIterator&lt;Iter, const T&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt; 
  void replace_if(Iter first, Iter last, 
                  Pred pred, const T&amp; new_value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<del>1 <i>Requires:</i> The expression <tt>*first = new_value</tt> shall be valid.</del>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
25.3.5 [alg.replace]/4: Remove the sentence "The results of the
expressions <tt>*first</tt> and
<tt>new_value</tt> shall be writable to the result output iterator.".
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;InputIterator InIter, typename OutIter, class T&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, InIter::reference&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, const T&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; HasEqualTo&lt;InIter::value_type, T&gt; 
  OutIter replace_copy(InIter first, InIter last, 
                       OutIter result, 
                       const T&amp; old_value, const T&amp; new_value);

template&lt;InputIterator InIter, typename OutIter,
         Predicate&lt;auto, InIter::value_type&gt; Pred, class T&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, InIter::reference&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, const T&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt; 
  OutIter replace_copy_if(InIter first, InIter last, 
                          OutIter result, 
                          Pred pred, const T&amp; new_value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
4 <i>Requires:</i> <del>The results of the expressions <tt>*first</tt> and
<tt>new_value</tt> shall be writable to the <tt>result</tt> output
iterator.</del> The ranges <tt>[first,last)</tt> and <tt>[result,result +
(last - first))</tt> shall not overlap.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="914"></a>914. Superfluous requirement for unique</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-03 <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.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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
25.3.9 [alg.unique]/2: "Requires: The comparison function shall be an
equivalence relation."
</p>

<p>
The essence of this is already covered by the given requirement
</p>

<blockquote><pre>EquivalenceRelation&lt;auto, Iter::value_type&gt; Pred
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
and should thus be removed.
</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>
Remove 25.3.9 [alg.unique]/2
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter&gt;
  requires OutputIterator&lt;Iter, Iter::reference&gt;
        &amp;&amp; EqualityComparable&lt;Iter::value_type&gt;
  Iter unique(Iter first, Iter last);

template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, EquivalenceRelation&lt;auto, Iter::value_type&gt; Pred&gt;
  requires OutputIterator&lt;Iter, RvalueOf&lt;Iter::reference&gt;::type&gt;
        &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
  Iter unique(Iter first, Iter last,
               Pred pred);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
1 <i>Effects:</i> ...
</p>
<p>
<del>2 <i>Requires:</i> The comparison function shall be an equivalence relation.</del>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="915"></a>915. <tt>minmax</tt> with <tt>initializer_list</tt> should return
<tt>pair</tt> of <tt>T</tt>, not <tt>pair</tt> of <tt>const T&amp;</tt></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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-04 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
It seems that the proposed changes for
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2772.pdf">N2772</a>
were not clear enough in
this point:
</p>

<blockquote>
25.4.7 [alg.min.max], before p.23 + p.24 + before p. 27 + p. 28 say that the return
type of the <tt>minmax</tt> overloads with an <tt>initializer_list</tt> is
<tt>pair&lt;const T&amp;, const T&amp;&gt;</tt>,
which is inconsistent with the decision for the other <tt>min/max</tt> overloads which take
a <tt>initializer_list</tt> as argument and return a <tt>T</tt>, not a <tt>const T&amp;</tt>.
Doing otherwise for <tt>minmax</tt> would easily lead to unexpected life-time
problems by using <tt>minmax</tt> instead of <tt>min</tt> and <tt>max</tt> separately.
</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
tweaked for concepts removal.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-18 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend NAD since the proposed changes have already been performed
as part of editorial work of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Can't find initializer_list form of minmax anymore, only variadic
version. Seems like we had an editing clash with concepts. Leave Open,
at least until editorial issues resolved. Bring this to Editor's
attention.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Pete to reapply
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2772.pdf">N2772</a>.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Solved by reapplying
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2772.pdf">N2772</a>.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 25 [algorithms]/2, header <tt>&lt;algorithm&gt;</tt> synopsis change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;<del>class</del><ins>LessThanComparable</ins> T&gt;
<ins>requires CopyConstructible&lt;T&gt;</ins>
pair&lt;<del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>, <del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>&gt;
minmax(initializer_list&lt;T&gt; t);

template&lt;class T, <del>class</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt;</ins> Compare&gt;
<ins>requires CopyConstructible&lt;T&gt;</ins>
pair&lt;<del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>, <del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>&gt;
minmax(initializer_list&lt;T&gt; t, Compare comp);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 25.4.7 [alg.min.max] change as indicated (Begin: Just before p.20):
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;<del>class</del><ins>LessThanComparable</ins> T&gt;
  <ins>requires CopyConstructible&lt;T&gt;</ins>
  pair&lt;<del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>, <del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>&gt;
  minmax(initializer_list&lt;T&gt; t);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<del>-20- <i>Requires:</i> <tt>T</tt> is <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> and
<tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</del>
</p>
<p>
-21- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>pair&lt;<del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>, <del>const
</del>T<del>&amp;</del>&gt;(x, y)</tt> where <tt>x</tt> is the
smallest value and <tt>y</tt> the largest value in the <tt>initializer_list</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>[..]</p>
<pre>template&lt;class T, <del>class</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt;</ins> Compare&gt;
  <ins>requires CopyConstructible&lt;T&gt;</ins>
  pair&lt;<del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>, <del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>&gt;
  minmax(initializer_list&lt;T&gt; t, Compare comp);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
<del>-24- <i>Requires:</i> type <tt>T</tt> is <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> and <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>.</del>
</p>
<p>
-25- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>pair&lt;<del>const </del>T<del>&amp;</del>, <del>const
</del>T<del>&amp;</del>&gt;(x, y)</tt> where <tt>x</tt> is the
smallest value and <tt>y</tt> largest value in the <tt>initializer_list</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="916"></a>916. Redundant move-assignment operator of <tt>pair</tt> should be removed</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-04 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>see also <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#917">917</a>.</b></p>

<p>
The current WP provides the following assignment operators for <tt>pair</tt>
in 20.3.5 [pairs]/1:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
<pre>template&lt;class U , class V&gt;
requires HasAssign&lt;T1, const U&amp;&gt; &amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt;T2, const V&amp;&gt;
pair&amp; operator=(const pair&lt;U , V&gt;&amp; p);
</pre>
</li>
<li>
<pre>requires MoveAssignable&lt;T1&gt; &amp;&amp; MoveAssignable&lt;T2&gt; pair&amp; operator=(pair&amp;&amp; p );
</pre>
</li>
<li>
<pre>template&lt;class U , class V&gt;
requires HasAssign&lt;T1, RvalueOf&lt;U&gt;::type&gt; &amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt;T2, RvalueOf&lt;V&gt;::type&gt;
pair&amp; operator=(pair&lt;U , V&gt;&amp;&amp; p);
</pre>
</li>
</ol>

<p>
It seems that the functionality of (2) is completely covered by (3), therefore
(2) should be removed.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Bill believes the extra assignment operators are necessary for resolving
ambiguities, but that does not mean it needs to be part of the specification.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
We recommend this be looked at in the context of the ongoing work
related to the pair templates.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave this open pending the removal of concepts from the WD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD, see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#801">801</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol type="A">
<li>
<p>
In 20.3.5 [pairs] p. 1, class <tt>pair</tt> and just before p. 13 remove the declaration:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires MoveAssignable&lt;T1&gt; &amp;&amp; MoveAssignable&lt;T2&gt; pair&amp; operator=(pair&amp;&amp; p );
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
Remove p.13+p.14
</li>

</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="917"></a>917. Redundant move-assignment operator of <tt>tuple</tt> should be removed</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-04 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>see also <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#916">916</a>.</b></p>
<p>
N2770 (and thus now the WP) removed the
non-template move-assignment operator from tuple's class definition,
but the latter individual member description does still provide this
operator. Is this (a) an oversight and can it (b) be solved as part of an
editorial process?
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We believe that the proposed resolution's part 1 is editorial.
</p>
<p>
Regarding part 2, we either remove the specification as proposed,
or else add back the declaration to which the specification refers.
Alisdair and Bill prefer the latter.
It is not immediately obvious whether the function is intended to be present.
</p>
<p>
We recommend that the Project Editor restore the missing declaration
and that we keep part 2 of the issue alive.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave this open pending the removal of concepts from the WD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD, see issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#801">801</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple], class <tt>tuple</tt> just before member <tt>swap</tt> please
change as indicated:
</p>
<p><i>[
This fixes an editorial loss between N2798 to N2800
]</i></p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
requires HasAssign&lt;Types, const UTypes&amp;&gt;...
<ins>tuple&amp; operator=(const pair&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);</ins>

template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
requires HasAssign&lt;Types, RvalueOf&lt;UTypes&gt;::type&gt;...
<ins>tuple&amp; operator=(pair&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;&amp;);</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr], starting just before p. 11 please remove
as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>requires MoveAssignable&lt;Types&gt;... tuple&amp; operator=(tuple&amp;&amp; u);</del>
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<del>-11- <i>Effects:</i> Move-assigns each element of <tt>u</tt> to the corresponding
element of <tt>*this</tt>.</del>
</p>
<p>
<del>-12- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>.</del>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="918"></a>918. Swap for tuple needs to be conceptualized</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.3 [tuple.swap] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-04 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#522">522</a> was accepted after <tt>tuple</tt> had been conceptualized,
therefore this step needs to be completed.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel adds
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This is now NAD Editorial (addressed by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2844.html">N2844</a>)
except for item 3 in the proposed wording.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-01 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
As of the recent WP
(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">N2857</a>),
this issue is now completely covered by editorial
changes (including the third bullet), therefore I unconditionally recommend
NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We observed that all the proposed changes have already been applied to the
Working Draft, rendering this issue moot.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In both 20.4.1 [tuple.general]/2 and 20.4.2.9 [tuple.special] change
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> <ins>Swappable</ins>... Types&gt;
void swap(tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp; x, tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp; y);
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
In 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple], class <tt>tuple</tt> definition and in
20.4.2.3 [tuple.swap], change
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>requires Swappable&lt;Types&gt;...</ins>void swap(tuple&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
In 20.4.2.3 [tuple.swap] remove the current requires-clause, which says:
</p>

<blockquote>
<del><i>Requires:</i> Each type in <tt>Types</tt> shall be <tt>Swappable</tt></del>
</blockquote>
</li>

</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="919"></a>919. (forward_)list specialized remove algorithms are over constrained</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The signatures of <tt>forwardlist::remove</tt> and <tt>list::remove</tt>
defined in 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops] before 11 + 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] before 15:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires EqualityComparable&lt;T&gt; void remove(const T&amp; value);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
are asymmetric to their predicate variants (which only require
<tt>Predicate</tt>, <em>not</em> <tt>EquivalenceRelation</tt>) and with the free algorithm
remove (which only require <tt>HasEqualTo</tt>). Also, nothing in the
pre-concept WP
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>
implies that <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> should
be the intended requirement.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution,
but would like additional input from concepts experts.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-21 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Current rationale and wording for this issue is built around concepts. I
suggest the issue reverts to Open status. I believe there is enough of
an issue to review after concepts are removed from the WP to re-examine
the issue in Santa Cruz, rather than resolve as NAD Concepts.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-10 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend NAD: The concept-free wording as of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a>
has no longer the
over-specified requirement
<tt>EqualityComparable</tt> for the remove function that uses <tt>==</tt>. In fact, now
the same test conditions exists
as for the free algorithm <tt>remove</tt> (25.3.8 [alg.remove]). The error was
introduced in the process of conceptifying.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD, solved by the removal of concepts.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol type="A">
<li>
<p>
Replace in 23.3.3.5 [forwardlist.ops] before 11 and in 23.3.4.4 [list.ops] before 15
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires <del>EqualityComparable&lt;T&gt;</del> <ins>HasEqualTo&lt;T, T&gt;</ins> void remove(const T&amp; value);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="923"></a>923. atomics with floating-point </h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-17 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Right now, C++0x doesn't have <tt>atomic&lt;float&gt;</tt>. We're thinking of adding
the words to support it for TR2 (note: that would be slightly
post-C++0x). If we need it, we could probably add the words.
</p>
<p>
<b>Proposed resolutions:</b> Using <tt>atomic&lt;FP&gt;::compare_exchange</tt> (weak or
strong) should be either:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
ill-formed, or
</li>
<li>
well-defined.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
I propose Option 1 for C++0x for expediency. If someone wants to argue
for Option 2, they need to say what exactly they want <tt>compare_exchange</tt>
to mean in this case (IIRC, C++0x doesn't even assume IEEE 754).
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to open. Blocked until concepts for atomics are addressed.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Anthony adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Recommend NAD. C++0x does have <tt>std::atomic&lt;float&gt;</tt>, and both
<tt>compare_exchange_weak</tt> and <tt>compare_exchange_strong</tt> are well-defined in
this case. Maybe change the note in 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] paragraph 20 to:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
[<i>Note:</i> The effect of the compare-and-exchange operations is
</p>
<blockquote><pre>if (!memcmp(object,expected,sizeof(*object)))
    *object = desired;
else
    *expected = *object;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This may result in failed comparisons for values that compare equal if
the underlying type has padding bits or alternate representations of
the same value. <i>-- end note</i>]
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the note in 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] paragraph 20 to:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
[<i>Note:</i> The effect of the compare-and-exchange operations is
</p>
<blockquote><pre>if (<del>*object == *expected</del> <ins>!memcmp(object,expected,sizeof(*object))</ins>)
    *object = desired;
else
    *expected = *object;
</pre></blockquote>

<p><ins>
This may result in failed comparisons for values that compare equal if
the underlying type has padding bits or alternate representations of
the same value.</ins> <i>-- end note</i>]
</p>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="924"></a>924. structs with internal padding</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-17 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Right now, the <tt>compare_exchange_weak</tt> loop should rapidly converge on the
padding contents. But <tt>compare_exchange_strong</tt> will require a bit more
compiler work to ignore padding for comparison purposes.
</p>
<p>
Note that this isn't a problem for structs with no padding, and we do
already have one portable way to ensure that there is no padding that
covers the key use cases: Have elements be the same type. I suspect that
the greatest need is for a structure of two pointers, which has no
padding problem. I suspect the second need is a structure of a pointer
and some form of an integer. If that integer is <tt>intptr_t</tt>, there will be
no padding.
</p>
<p>
Related but separable issue: For unused bitfields, or other unused
fields for that matter, we should probably say it's the programmer's
responsibility to set them to zero or otherwise ensure they'll be
ignored by <tt>memcmp</tt>.
</p>

<p>
<b>Proposed resolutions:</b> Using
<tt>atomic&lt;struct-with-padding&gt;::compare_exchange_strong</tt> should be either:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
ill-formed, or
</li>
<li>
well-defined.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
I propose Option 1 for C++0x for expediency, though I'm not sure how to
say it. I would be happy with Option 2, which I believe would mean that
<tt>compare_exchange_strong</tt> would be implemented to avoid comparing padding
bytes, or something equivalent such as always zeroing out padding when
loading/storing/comparing. (Either implementation might require compiler
support.)
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to open. Blocked until concepts for atomics are addressed.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Anthony adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The resoultion of LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#923">923</a> should resolve this issue as well.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="926"></a>926. Sequentially consistent fences, relaxed operations and modification order</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-19 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 313</b></p>

<p>
There was an interesting issue raised over on comp.programming.threads
today regarding the following example
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// Thread 1:
x.store(1, memory_order_relaxed);           // SX
atomic_thread_fence(memory_order_seq_cst);  // F1
y.store(1, memory_order_relaxed);           // SY1
atomic_thread_fence(memory_order_seq_cst);  // F2
r1 = y.load(memory_order_relaxed);          // RY

// Thread 2:
y.store(0, memory_order_relaxed);          // SY2
atomic_thread_fence(memory_order_seq_cst); // F3
r2 = x.load(memory_order_relaxed);         // RX
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
is the outcome <tt>r1 == 0</tt> and <tt>r2 == 0</tt> possible?
</p>
<p>
I think the intent is that this is not possible, but I am not sure the
wording guarantees that. Here is my analysis:
</p>
<p>
Since all the fences are SC, there must be a total order between them.
<tt>F1</tt> must be before <tt>F2</tt> in that order since they are in
the same thread. Therefore <tt>F3</tt> is either before <tt>F1</tt>,
between <tt>F1</tt> and <tt>F2</tt> or after <tt>F2</tt>.
</p>
<p>
If <tt>F3</tt> is <em>after</em> <tt>F2</tt>, then we can apply 29.3 [atomics.order]p5 from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>:
</p>

<blockquote>
For atomic operations <tt>A</tt> and <tt>B</tt> on an atomic object
<tt>M</tt>, where <tt>A</tt> modifies <tt>M</tt> and <tt>B</tt> takes
its value, if there are <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> fences <tt>X</tt>
and <tt>Y</tt> such that <tt>A</tt> is sequenced before <tt>X</tt>,
<tt>Y</tt> is sequenced before <tt>B</tt>, and <tt>X</tt> precedes
<tt>Y</tt> in <tt>S</tt>, then <tt>B</tt> observes either the effects of
<tt>A</tt> or a later modification of <tt>M</tt> in its modification
order.
</blockquote>

<p>
In this case, <tt>A</tt> is <tt>SX</tt>, <tt>B</tt> is <tt>RX</tt>, the
fence <tt>X</tt> is <tt>F2</tt> and the fence <tt>Y</tt> is <tt>F3</tt>,
so <tt>RX</tt> must see 1.
</p>
<p>
If <tt>F3</tt> is <em>before</em> <tt>F2</tt>, this doesn't apply, but
<tt>F3</tt> can therefore be before or after <tt>F1</tt>.
</p>
<p>
If <tt>F3</tt> is <em>after</em> <tt>F1</tt>, the same logic applies, but this
time the fence <tt>X</tt> is <tt>F1</tt>. Therefore again, <tt>RX</tt>
must see 1.
</p>
<p>
Finally we have the case that <tt>F3</tt> is <em>before</em> <tt>F1</tt>
in the SC ordering. There are now no guarantees about <tt>RX</tt>, and
<tt>RX</tt> can see <tt>r2==0</tt>.
</p>
<p>
We can apply 29.3 [atomics.order]p5 again. This time,
<tt>A</tt> is <tt>SY2</tt>, <tt>B</tt> is <tt>RY</tt>, <tt>X</tt> is
<tt>F3</tt> and <tt>Y</tt> is <tt>F1</tt>. Thus <tt>RY</tt> must observe
the effects of <tt>SY2</tt> or a later modification of <tt>y</tt> in its
modification order.
</p>
<p>
Since <tt>SY1</tt> is sequenced before <tt>RY</tt>, <tt>RY</tt> must
observe the effects of <tt>SY1</tt> or a later modification of
<tt>y</tt> in its modification order.
</p>
<p>
In order to ensure that <tt>RY</tt> sees <tt>(r1==1)</tt>, we must see
that <tt>SY1</tt> is later in the modification order of <tt>y</tt> than
<tt>SY2</tt>.
</p>
<p>
We're now skating on thin ice. Conceptually, <tt>SY2</tt> happens-before
<tt>F3</tt>, <tt>F3</tt> is SC-ordered before <tt>F1</tt>, <tt>F1</tt>
happens-before <tt>SY1</tt>, so <tt>SY1</tt> is later in the
modification order <tt>M</tt> of <tt>y</tt>, and <tt>RY</tt> must see
the result of <tt>SY1</tt> (<tt>r1==1</tt>). However, I don't think the
words are clear on that.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Hans adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
In my (Hans') view, our definition of fences will always be weaker than
what particular hardware will guarantee.  <tt>Memory_order_seq_cst</tt> fences
inherently don't guarantee sequential consistency anyway, for good
reasons (e.g. because they can't enforce a total order on stores).
 Hence I don't think the issue demonstrates a gross failure to achieve
what we intended to achieve.  The example in question is a bit esoteric.
 Hence, in my view, living with the status quo certainly wouldn't be a
disaster either.
</p>
<p>
In any case, we should probably add text along the lines of the
following between p5 and p6 in 29.3 [atomics.order]:
</p>
<blockquote>
[Note: <tt>Memory_order_seq_cst</tt> only ensures sequential consistency for a
data-race-free program that uses exclusively <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>
operations.  Any use of weaker ordering will invalidate this guarantee
unless extreme care is used.  In particular, <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> fences
only ensure a total order for the fences themselves.  They cannot, in
general, be used to restore sequential consistency for atomic operations
with weaker ordering specifications.]
</blockquote>

<p>
Also see thread beginning at c++std-lib-23271.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Herve's correction:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Minor point, and sorry for the knee jerk reaction: I admit to having
no knowledge of Memory_order_seq_cst, but my former boss (John Lakos)
has ingrained an automatic introspection on the use of "only".   I
think you meant:
</p>

<blockquote>
[Note: <tt>Memory_order_seq_cst</tt> ensures sequential consistency only
for . . . .  In particular, <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> fences ensure a
total order only for . . .
</blockquote>
<p>
Unless, of course, <tt>Memory_order_seq_cst</tt> really do nothing but ensure
sequential consistency for a data-race-free program that uses
exclusively <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> operations.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a new paragraph after 29.3 [atomics.order]p5 that says
</p>

<blockquote>
For atomic operations <tt>A</tt> and <tt>B</tt> on an atomic object
<tt>M</tt>, where <tt>A</tt> and <tt>B</tt> modify <tt>M</tt>, if there
are <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt> fences <tt>X</tt> and <tt>Y</tt> such
that <tt>A</tt> is sequenced before <tt>X</tt>, <tt>Y</tt> is sequenced
before <tt>B</tt>, and <tt>X</tt> precedes <tt>Y</tt> in <tt>S</tt>,
then <tt>B</tt> occurs later than <tt>A</tt> in the modifiction order of
<tt>M</tt>.
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="927"></a>927. <tt>Dereferenceable</tt>  should be <tt>HasDereference</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [allocator.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pablo Halpern <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-23 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
X [allocator.concepts] contains a reference to a concept named
<tt>Dereferenceable</tt>. No such concept exists.
</p>

<p><i>[
Daniel adds 2009-02-14:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposal given in the paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2829.pdf">N2829</a>
would automatically resolve this issue.
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
This particular set of changes has already been made.
There are two related changes later on (and possibly also an earlier Example);
these can be handled editorially.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change all uses of the concept <tt>Dereferenceable</tt> to
<tt>HasDereference</tt> in X [allocator.concepts].
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="928"></a>928. Wrong concepts used for <tt>tuple</tt>'s comparison operators</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Joe Gottman <b>Opened:</b> 2008-10-28 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In the latest working draft for C++0x, <tt>tuple</tt>'s <tt>operator==</tt> and <tt>operator&lt;</tt>
are declared as 
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt; 
  requires EqualityComparable&lt;TTypes, UTypes&gt;... 
  bool operator==(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp; t, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp; u);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
and
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt; 
  requires LessThanComparable&lt;TTypes, UTypes&gt;... 
  bool operator&lt;(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp; t, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp; u);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
But the concepts <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> and <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> only take one 
parameter, not two.  Also, even if <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> could take two 
parameters, the definition of <tt>tuple::operator&lt;()</tt> should also require 
</p>

<blockquote><pre>LessThanComparable&lt;UTypes, TTypes&gt;... // (note the order) 
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
since the algorithm for <tt>tuple::operator&lt;</tt> is the following (pseudo-code)
</p>

<blockquote><pre>for (size_t N = 0; N &lt; sizeof...(TTypes); ++N) { 
    if (get&lt;N&gt;(t) &lt; get&lt;N&gt;(u) return true; 
    else if ((get&lt;N&gt;(u) &lt; get&lt;N&gt;(t)) return false; 
} 

return false; 
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Similar problems hold for <tt>tuples</tt>'s other comparison operators.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend Tentatively Ready.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.4.1 [tuple.general] and 20.4.2.7 [tuple.rel] change:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt;
  requires <del>EqualityComparable</del><ins>HasEqualTo</ins>&lt;TTypes, UTypes&gt;...
  bool operator==(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp;, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);

template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt;
  requires <del>LessThanComparable</del><ins>HasLess</ins>&lt;TTypes, UTypes&gt;... <ins>&amp;&amp; HasLess&lt;UTypes, TTypes&gt;...</ins>
  bool operator&lt;(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp;, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);

template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt;
  requires <del>EqualityComparable</del><ins>HasEqualTo</ins>&lt;TTypes, UTypes&gt;...
  bool operator!=(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp;, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);

template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt;
  requires <del>LessThanComparable</del><ins>HasLess</ins>&lt;<del>U</del><ins>T</ins>Types, <del>T</del><ins>U</ins>Types&gt;... <ins>&amp;&amp; HasLess&lt;UTypes, TTypes&gt;...</ins>
  bool operator&gt;(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp;, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);

template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt;
  requires <del>LessThanComparable</del><ins>HasLess</ins>&lt;<del>U</del><ins>T</ins>Types, <del>T</del><ins>U</ins>Types&gt;... <ins>&amp;&amp; HasLess&lt;UTypes, TTypes&gt;...</ins>
  bool operator&lt;=(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp;, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);

template&lt;class... TTypes, class... UTypes&gt;
  requires <del>LessThanComparable</del><ins>HasLess</ins>&lt;TTypes, UTypes&gt;... <ins>&amp;&amp; HasLess&lt;UTypes, TTypes&gt;...</ins>
  bool operator&gt;=(const tuple&lt;TTypes...&gt;&amp;, const tuple&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="930"></a>930. Access to std::array data as built-in array type</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-11-17 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The Working Draft (N2798) allows access to the elements of
<tt>std::array</tt> by its <tt>data()</tt> member function:
</p>

<blockquote>

<h5>23.2.1.4 array::data [array.data]</h5>
<pre> T *data();
 const T *data() const;
</pre>
<ol><li>
 Returns: elems.
</li></ol>
</blockquote>

<p>
Unfortunately, the result of <tt>std::array::data()</tt> cannot be bound
to a reference to a built-in array of the type of <tt>array::elems</tt>.
And <tt>std::array</tt> provides no other way to get a reference to
<tt>array::elems</tt>. 
This hampers the use of <tt>std::array</tt>, for example when trying to
pass its data to a C style API function:
</p>

<pre> // Some C style API function. 
 void set_path( char (*)[MAX_PATH] );

 std::array&lt;char,MAX_PATH&gt; path;
 set_path( path.data() );  // error
 set_path( &amp;(path.data()) );  // error
</pre>

 <p>
Another example, trying to pass the array data to an instance of another
C++ class:
</p>

<pre> // Represents a 3-D point in space.
 class three_d_point {
 public:
   explicit three_d_point(const double (&amp;)[3]); 
 };

 const std::array&lt;double,3&gt; coordinates = { 0, 1, 2 };
 three_d_point point1( coordinates.data() );  // error.
 three_d_point point2( *(coordinates.data()) );  // error.
</pre>

<p>
A user might be tempted to use <tt>std::array::elems</tt> instead, but
doing so isn't recommended, because <tt>std::array::elems</tt> is "for
exposition only".  Note that Boost.Array users might already use
<tt>boost::array::elems</tt>, as its documentation doesn't explicitly
state that <tt>boost::array::elems</tt> is for exposition only:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_36_0/doc/html/boost/array.html
</p>
<p>
I can think of three options to solve this issue:
</p>
<ol><li>
Remove the words "exposition only" from the definition of
<tt>std::array::elems</tt>, as well as the note saying that "elems is
shown for exposition only."
</li><li>
Change the signature of <tt>std::array::data()</tt>, so that it would
return a reference to the built-in array, instead of a pointer to its
first element.
</li><li>
Add extra member functions, returning a reference to the built-in array.
</li></ol>
<p>
Lawrence Crowl wrote me that it might be better to leave
<tt>std::array::elems</tt> "for exposition only", to allow alternate
representations to allocate the array data dynamically.  This might be
of interest to the embedded community, having to deal with very limited
stack sizes.
</p>
<p>
The second option, changing the return type of
<tt>std::array::data()</tt>, would break backward compatible to current
Boost and TR1 implementations, as well as to the other contiguous
container (<tt>vector</tt> and <tt>string</tt>) in a very subtle way.
For example, the following call to <tt>std::swap</tt> currently swap two
locally declared pointers <tt>(data1, data2)</tt>, for any container
type <tt>T</tt> that has a <tt>data()</tt> member function. When
<tt>std::array::data()</tt> is changed to return a reference, the
<tt>std::swap</tt> call may swap the container elements instead.
</p>

<pre> template &lt;typename T&gt;
 void func(T&amp; container1, T&amp; container2)
 {
   // Are data1 and data2 pointers or references?
   auto data1 = container1.data();
   auto data2 = container2.data();

   // Will this swap two local pointers, or all container elements?
   std::swap(data1, data2);
 }
</pre>

<p>
The following concept is currently satisfied by all contiguous
containers, but it no longer is for <tt>std::array</tt>, when
<tt>array::data()</tt>
is changed to return a reference (tested on ConceptGCC Alpha 7):
</p>

<pre> auto concept ContiguousContainerConcept&lt;typename T&gt;
 {
   typename value_type = typename T::value_type;
   const value_type * T::data() const;
 }
</pre>

<p>
Still it's worth considering having <tt>std::array::data()</tt> return a
reference, because it might be the most intuitive option, from a user's
point of view.  Nicolai Josuttis (who wrote <tt>boost::array</tt>)
mailed me that he very much prefers this option.
</p>
<p>
Note that for this option, the definition of <tt>data()</tt> would also
need to be revised for zero-sized arrays, as its return type cannot be a
reference to a zero-sized built-in array.  Regarding zero-sized array,
<tt>data()</tt> could throw an exception.  Or there could be a partial
specialization of <tt>std::array</tt> where <tt>data()</tt> returns
<tt>T*</tt> or gets removed.
</p>
<p>
Personally I prefer the third option, adding a new member function to
<tt>std::array</tt>, overloaded for const and non-const access,
returning a reference to the built-in array, to avoid those compatible
issues. I'd propose naming the function <tt>std::array::c_array()</tt>,
which sounds intuitive to me. Note that <tt>boost::array</tt> already
has a <tt>c_array()</tt> member, returning a pointer, but Nicolai told
me that this one is only there for historical reasons. (Otherwise a name
like <tt>std::array::native_array()</tt> or
<tt>std::array::builtin_array()</tt> would also be fine with me.) 
According to my proposed resolution, a zero-sized <tt>std::array</tt> does not need
to have <tt>c_array()</tt>, while it is still required to have
<tt>data()</tt> functions.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>

<p>
Alisdair: Don't like p4 suggesting implementation-defined behaviour.
</p>
<p>
Walter: What about an explicit conversion operator, instead of adding
the new member function?
</p>
<p>
Alisdair: Noodling about:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;size_t N, ValueType T&gt;
struct array
{
  T elems[N];

// fantasy code starts here

// crazy decltype version for grins only
//requires True&lt;(N&gt;0)&gt;
//explict operator decltype(elems) &amp; () { return elems; }

// conversion to lvalue ref
requires True&lt;(N&gt;0)&gt;
explict operator T(&amp;)[N] () &amp; { return elems; }

// conversion to const lvalue ref
requires True&lt;(N&gt;0)&gt;
explict operator const T(&amp;)[N] () const &amp; { return elems; }

// conversion to rvalue ref using ref qualifiers
requires True&lt;(N&gt;0)&gt;
explict operator T(&amp;&amp;)[N] () &amp;&amp; { return elems; }

// fantasy code ends here

explicit operator bool() { return true; }
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This seems legal but odd. Jason Merrill says currently a CWG issue 613
on the non-static data member that fixes the error that current G++
gives for the non-explicit, non-conceptualized version of this. Verdict
from human compiler: seems legal.
</p>
<p>
Some grumbling about zero-sized arrays being allowed and supported.
</p>
<p>
Walter: Would this address the issue? Are we inclined to go this route?
</p>
<p>
Alan: What would usage look like?
</p>
<blockquote><pre>// 3-d point in space
struct three_d_point
{
  explicit three_d_point(const double (&amp;)[3]);
};

void sink(double*);

const std::array&lt;double, 3&gt; coordinates = { 0, 1, 2 };
three_d_point point1( coordinates.data() ); //error
three_d_point point2( *(coordinates.data()) ); // error
three_d_point point3( coordinates ); // yay!

sink(cooridinates); // error, no conversion
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Recommended Open with new wording. Take the required clause and add the
explicit conversion operators, not have a <tt>typedef</tt>. At issue still is use
<tt>decltype</tt> or use <tt>T[N]</tt>. In favour of using <tt>T[N]</tt>, even though use of
<tt>decltype</tt> is specially clever.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, further discussion in the thread starting with c++std-lib-23215.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt (Saturday afternoon group):
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The idea to resolve the issue by adding explicit conversion operators
was abandoned, because it would be inconvenient to use, especially when
passing the array to a template function, as mentioned by Daniel. So we
reconsidered the original proposed resolution, which appeared
acceptable, except for its proposed changes to 23.3.1.7 [array.zero], which
allowed <tt>c_array_type</tt> and <tt>c_array()</tt> to be absent for a zero-sized array.
Alisdair argued that such wording would disallow certain generic use
cases. New wording for 23.3.1.7 [array.zero] was agreed upon (Howard: and
is reflected in the proposed resolution).
</p>
<p>
Move to Review
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-31 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I will be unhappy voting the proposed resolution for 930 past review
until we have implementation experience with reference qualifiers. 
Specifically, I want to understand the impact of the missing overload
for <tt>const &amp;&amp;</tt> (if any.)
</p>

<p>
If we think the issue is important enough it might be worthwhile
stripping the ref qualifiers for easy progress next meeting, and opening
yet another issue to put them back with experience.
</p>

<p>
Recommend deferring any decision on splitting the issue until we get LWG
feedback next meeting - I may be the lone dissenting voice if others are
prepared to proceed without it.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD. There was not enough consensus that this was sufficiently
useful. There are known other ways to do this, such as small inline
conversion functions.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to the template definition of array, 23.3.1 [array]/3:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre><ins>
typedef T c_array_type[N];
c_array_type &amp; c_array() &amp;;
c_array_type &amp;&amp; c_array() &amp;&amp;;
const c_array_type &amp; c_array() const &amp;;
</ins>
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
Add the following subsection to 23.3.1 [array], after 23.3.1.4 [array.data]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<h5><ins>23.2.1.5 array::c_array [array.c_array]</ins></h5>
    <pre><ins>
c_array_type &amp; c_array() &amp;;
c_array_type &amp;&amp; c_array() &amp;&amp;;
const c_array_type &amp; c_array() const &amp;;
</ins></pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<ins><i>Returns:</i> <tt>elems</tt>.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>



<p>
Change Zero sized arrays 23.3.1.7 [array.zero]:
</p>

<blockquote>

<p>-2- ...</p>

<p><ins>
The type <tt>c_array_type</tt> is unspecified for a zero-sized array.
</ins></p>

<p>
-3- The effect of calling <ins><tt>c_array()</tt>,</ins> <tt>front()</tt><ins>,</ins> or
<tt>back()</tt> for a zero-sized array is implementation defined.
</p>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="933"></a>933. Unique_ptr defect</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2008-11-27 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
If we are supporting stateful deleters, we need an overload for
<tt>reset</tt> that
takes a deleter as well.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void reset( pointer p, deleter_type d);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
We probably need two overloads to support move-only deleters, and
this
sounds uncomfortably like the two constructors I have been ignoring
for
now...
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Howard comments that we have the functionality via move-assigment.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD Future.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="935"></a>935. clock error handling needs to be specified</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.5 [time.clock] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2008-11-24 <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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Each of the three clocks specified in Clocks 20.11.5 [time.clock]
provides the member function:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>static time_point now();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The semantics specified by Clock requirements 20.11.1 [time.clock.req]
make no mention of error handling. Thus the function may throw <tt>bad_alloc</tt>
or an implementation-defined exception (17.6.4.12 [res.on.exception.handling]
paragraph 4).
</p>

<p>
Some implementations of these functions on POSIX, Windows, and
presumably on other operating systems, may fail in ways only detectable
at runtime. Some failures on Windows are due to supporting chipset
errata and can even occur after successful calls to a clock's <tt>now()</tt>
function.
</p>

<p>
These functions are used in cases where exceptions are not appropriate
or where the specifics of the exception or cause of error need to be
available to the user. See
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2828.html">N2828</a>,
<i>Library Support for hybrid error
handling (Rev 1)</i>, for more specific discussion of use cases. Thus some change in
the interface of now is required.
</p>

<p>
The proposed resolution has been implemented in the Boost version of the
chrono library. No problems were encountered.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We recommend this issue be deferred until the next Committee Draft
has been issued and the prerequisite paper has been accepted.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD future. Too late to make this change without having already
accepted the hybrid error handling proposal.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Accept the proposed wording of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2828.html">N2828</a>,
<i>Library Support for hybrid error handling (Rev 1)</i>.
</p>

<p>
Change Clock requirements 20.11.1 [time.clock.req] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-2- In Table 55 <tt>C1</tt> and <tt>C2</tt> denote clock types. <tt>t1</tt> and
<tt>t2</tt> are values returned by <tt>C1::now()</tt> where the call 
returning <tt>t1</tt> happens before (1.10) the call returning <tt>t2</tt> and
both of these calls happen before <tt>C1::time_point::max()</tt>.
<ins><tt>ec</tt> denotes an object of type <tt>error_code</tt> 
(19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview]).</ins>
</p>

<table border="1">
<caption>Table 55 -- Clock requirements</caption>
<tbody><tr>
<th>Expression</th><th>Return type</th><th>Operational semantics</th>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td><tt>C1::now()</tt></td>
<td><tt>C1::time_point</tt></td>
<td>Returns a <tt>time_point</tt> object representing the current point in time.
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td><tt><ins>C1::now(ec)</ins></tt></td>
<td><tt><ins>C1::time_point</ins></tt></td>
<td><ins>Returns a <tt>time_point</tt> object representing the current point in time.</ins>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change Class system_clock 20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>static time_point now(<ins>error_code&amp; ec=throws()</ins>);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change Class monotonic_clock X [time.clock.monotonic] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>static time_point now(<ins>error_code&amp; ec=throws()</ins>);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change Class high_resolution_clock 20.11.5.3 [time.clock.hires] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>static time_point now(<ins>error_code&amp; ec=throws()</ins>);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="936"></a>936. Mutex type overspecified</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-05 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#961">961</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>



<p>
30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] describes the requirements for a type to be
a "Mutex type". A Mutex type can be used as the template argument for
the <tt>Lock</tt> type that's passed to <tt>condition_variable_any::wait</tt> (although
<tt>Lock</tt> seems like the wrong name here, since <tt>Lock</tt> is given a different
formal meaning in 30.4.2 [thread.lock]) and, although the WD doesn't quite say
so, as the template argument for <tt>lock_guard</tt> and <tt>unique_lock</tt>.
</p>

<p>
The requirements for a Mutex type include:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
<tt>m.lock()</tt> shall be well-formed and have [described] semantics, including a return type of <tt>void</tt>.
</li>
<li>
<tt>m.try_lock()</tt> shall be well-formed and have [described] semantics, including a return type of <tt>bool</tt>.
</li>
<li>
<tt>m.unlock()</tt> shall be well-formed and have [described] semantics, including a return type of <tt>void</tt>.
</li>
</ul>

<p>
Also, a Mutex type "shall not be copyable nor movable".
</p>

<p>
The latter requirement seems completely irrelevant, and the three
requirements on return types are tighter than they need to be. For
example, there's no reason that <tt>lock_guard</tt> can't be instantiated with a
type that's copyable. The rule is, in fact, that <tt>lock_guard</tt>, etc. won't
try to copy objects of that type. That's a constraint on locks, not on
mutexes. Similarly, the requirements for <tt>void</tt> return types are
unnecessary; the rule is, in fact, that <tt>lock_guard</tt>, etc. won't use any
returned value. And with the return type of <tt>bool</tt>, the requirement should
be that the return type is convertible to <tt>bool</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Move to open. Related to conceptualization and should probably be tackled as part of that.
</p>
<ul>
<li>
The intention is not only to place a constraint on what types such as
<tt>lock_guard</tt> may do with mutex types, but on what any code, including user
code, may do with mutex types. Thus the constraints as they are apply to
the mutex types themselves, not the current users of mutex types in the
standard.
</li>
<li>
This is a low priority issue; the wording as it is may be overly
restrictive but this may not be a real issue.
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Anthony adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Section 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] conflates the
requirements on a generic Mutex type (including user-supplied mutexes)
with the requirements placed on the standard-supplied mutex types in an
attempt to group everything together and save space.
</p>
<p>
When applying concepts to chapter 30, I suggest that the concepts
<tt>Lockable</tt> and <tt>TimedLockable</tt> embody the requirements for
*use* of a mutex type as required by
<tt>unique_lock/lock_guard/condition_variable_any</tt>. These should be
relaxed as Pete describes in the issue. The existing words in 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] are requirements on all of
<tt>std::mutex</tt>, <tt>std::timed_mutex</tt>,
<tt>std::recursive_mutex</tt> and <tt>std::recursive_timed_mutex</tt>,
and should be rephrased as such.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="937"></a>937. Atomics for standard typedef types</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Clark Nelson <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-05 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 89</b></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The types in the table "Atomics for standard typedef types" should be
typedefs, not classes. These semantics are necessary for compatibility
with C.
</p>

<p>
Change the classes to typedefs.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2427.html">N2427</a>
specified different requirements for atomic analogs of fundamental
integer types (such as <tt>atomic_int</tt>) and for atomic analogs of <tt>&lt;cstdint&gt;</tt>
typedefs (such as <tt>atomic_size_t</tt>). Specifically, <tt>atomic_int</tt> et al. were
specified to be distinct classes, whereas <tt>atomic_size_t</tt> et al. were
specified to be typedefs. Unfortunately, in applying
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2427.html">N2427</a>
to the WD, that distinction was erased, and the atomic analog of every <tt>&lt;cstdint&gt;</tt>
typedef is required to be a distinct class.
</p>

<p>
It shouldn't be required that the atomic analog of every <tt>&lt;cstdint&gt;</tt>
typedef be a typedef for some fundamental integer type. After all,
<tt>&lt;cstdint&gt;</tt> is supposed to provide standard names for extended integer
types. So there was a problem in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2427.html">N2427</a>,
which certainly could have been
interpreted to require that. But the status quo in the WD is even worse,
because it's unambiguously wrong.
</p>

<p>
What is needed are words to require the existence of a bunch of type
names, without specifying whether they are class names or typedef names.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Change status to NAD, editorial. See US 89 comment notes above.
</p>
<p>
Direct the editor to turn the types into typedefs as proposed in the
comment. Paper approved by committee used typedefs, this appears to have
been introduced as an editorial change. Rationale: for compatibility
with C.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="940"></a>940. <tt>std::distance</tt></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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-14 <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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 270</b></p>

<p>
Regarding the <tt>std::distance</tt> - function, 24.4.4 [iterator.operations]
/ 4 says:
</p>
<blockquote>
Returns the
number of increments or decrements needed to get from first to last.
</blockquote>
<p>
This sentence is completely silent about the sign of the return value.
24.4.4 [iterator.operations] / 1 gives more information about the
underlying operations, but
again no inferences about the sign can be made.
Strictly speaking, that is taking that sentence literally, I think this
sentence even implies a positive return value in all cases, as the
number of increments or decrements is clearly a ratio scale variable,
with a natural zero bound.
</p>
<p>
Practically speaking, my implementations did what common sense and
knowledge based on pointer arithmetic forecasts, namely a positive sign
for increments (that is, going from <tt>first</tt> to <tt>last</tt> by <tt>operator++</tt>), and a
negative sign for decrements (going from <tt>first</tt> to <tt>last</tt> by <tt>operator--</tt>).
</p>
<p>
Here are my two questions:
</p>
<p>
First, is that paragraph supposed to be interpreted in the way what I
called 'common sense', that is negative sign for decrements ? I am
fairly sure that's the supposed behavior, but a double-check here in
this group can't hurt.
</p>
<p>
Second, is the present wording (2003 standard version - no idea about
the draft for the upcoming standard) worth an edit to make it a bit more
sensible, to mention the sign of the return value explicitly ?
</p>

<p><i>[
Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
My first thought was that resolution <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#204">204</a> would already cover the
issue report, but it seems that current normative wording is in
contradiction to that resolution:
</p>

<p>
Referring to
<a href="" ref="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>,
24.4.4 [iterator.operations]/ p.4 says:
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> Returns the number of increments or decrements needed to get
from <tt>first</tt> to <tt>last</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p>
IMO the part " or decrements" is in contradiction to p. 5 which says
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>last</tt> shall be reachable from <tt>first</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p>
because "reachable" is defined in X [iterator.concepts]/7 as
</p>

<blockquote>
An iterator <tt>j</tt> is called reachable from an iterator <tt>i</tt> if and only if
there is a finite
sequence of applications of the expression <tt>++i</tt> that makes <tt>i == j</tt>.[..]
</blockquote>

<p>
Here is wording that would be consistent with this definition of "reachable":
</p>

<p>
Change 24.4.4 [iterator.operations] p4 as follows:
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> Returns the number of increments <del>or decrements</del>
needed to get from <tt>first</tt> to <tt>last</tt>.
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Thomas adds more discussion and an alternative view point
<a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c++/browse_thread/thread/e8e46dcda0a5d797#">here</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposed wording below was verbally agreed to.  Howard provided.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Pete reports that a recent similar change has been made
for the <tt>advance()</tt> function.
</p>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
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>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave Open pending arrival of a post-Concepts WD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Daniel provided de-conceptified wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Ready, replacing the Effects clause in the proposed wording with
"If InputIterator meets the requirements of random access iterator then
returns (last - first), otherwise returns the number of increments
needed to get from first to list.".
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3066.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators], Table 105 as indicated [This change is not
essential but it simplifies the specification] for the row with
expression "<tt>b - a</tt>"
and the column Operational semantics:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>(a &lt; b) ? </del>distance(a,b)
<del>: -distance(b,a)</del>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 24.4.4 [iterator.operations]/4+5 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class InputIterator&gt;
  typename iterator_traits&lt;InputIterator&gt;::difference_type
    distance(InputIterator first, InputIterator last);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
4 <i>Effects:</i> <ins>If <tt>InputIterator</tt> meets the requirements
of random access iterator then returns <tt>(last - first)</tt>,
otherwise</ins> <del>R</del><ins>r</ins>eturns the number of increments
<del>or decrements</del> needed to get from <tt>first</tt> to
<tt>last</tt>.
</p>

<p>
5 <i>Requires:</i> <ins>If <tt>InputIterator</tt> meets the requirements
of random access iterator then <tt>last</tt> shall be reachable from
<tt>first</tt> or <tt>first</tt> shall be reachable from <tt>last</tt>,
otherwise</ins> <tt>last</tt> shall be reachable from <tt>first</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>









<hr>
<h3><a name="941"></a>941. Ref-qualifiers for assignment operators</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-18 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The assignment and equality operators <tt>=</tt> and <tt>==</tt> are easily confused, just
because of their visual similarity, and in this case a simple typo can cause
a serious bug. When the left side of an <tt>operator=</tt> is an rvalue, it's
highly unlikely that the assignment was intended by the programmer:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>if ( func() = value )  // Typical typo: == intended!
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Built-in types don't support assignment to an rvalue, but unfortunately,
a lot of types provided by the Standard Library do.
</p>
<p>
Fortunately the language now offers a syntax to prevent a certain member
function from having an rvalue as <tt>*this</tt>: by adding a ref-qualifier (<tt>&amp;</tt>)
to the member function declaration.  Assignment operators are explicitly
mentioned as a use case of ref-qualifiers, in "Extending Move Semantics
To <tt>*this</tt> (Revision 1)",
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1821.htm">N1821</a> by Daveed
Vandevoorde and Bronek Kozicki
</p>
<p>
Hereby I would like to propose adding ref-qualifiers to all appropriate
assignment operators in the library.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open.
We recommend this be deferred until after the next Committee Draft.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Frankfurt 2009-07:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The LWG declined to move forward with
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2819.html">N2819</a>.
</p>
<p>
Moved to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
A proposed resolution is provided by the paper on this subject,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2819.html">N2819</a>,
<i>Ref-qualifiers for assignment operators of the Standard Library</i>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="942"></a>942. Atomics synopsis typo</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Holger Grund <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-19 <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">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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#880">880</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>



<p>
I'm looking at 29 [atomics] and can't really make sense of a couple of things.
</p>
<p>
Firstly, there appears to be a typo in the <tt>&lt;cstdatomic&gt;</tt> synopsis:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The <tt>atomic_exchange</tt> overload taking an <tt>atomic_address</tt>
is missing the second parameter:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void* atomic_exchange(volatile atomic_address*);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
should be
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void* atomic_exchange(volatile atomic_address*<ins>, void*</ins>);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Note, that this is <em>not</em> covered by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#880">880</a> "Missing atomic exchange parameter",
which only talks about the <tt>atomic_bool</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in 29 [atomics]/2:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void* atomic_exchange(volatile atomic_address*<ins>, void*</ins>);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="944"></a>944. <tt>atomic&lt;bool&gt;</tt> derive from <tt>atomic_bool</tt>?</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I think it's fairly obvious that <tt>atomic&lt;bool&gt;</tt> is supposed to be derived
from <tt>atomic_bool</tt> (and otherwise follow the <tt>atomic&lt;integral&gt;</tt> interface),
though I think the current wording doesn't support this. I raised this
point along with <tt>atomic&lt;floating-point&gt;</tt> privately with Herb and I seem
to recall it came up in the resulting discussion on this list. However,
I don't see anything on the current libs issue list mentioning this
problem.
</p>

<p>
29.5 [atomics.types.generic]/3 reads
</p>

<blockquote>
There are full specializations over the integral types on the atomic
class template. For each integral type integral in the second column of
table 121 or table 122, the specialization <tt>atomic&lt;integral&gt;</tt> shall be
publicly derived from the corresponding atomic integral type in the
first column of the table. These specializations shall have trivial
default constructors and trivial destructors.
</blockquote>

<p>
Table 121 does not include (<tt>atomic_bool</tt>, <tt>bool</tt>),
so that this should probably be mentioned explicitly in the quoted paragraph.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to open. Lawrence will draft a proposed resolution. Also, ask
Howard to fix the title.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Anthony provided proposed wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Replace paragraph 3 in 29.5 [atomics.types.generic] with
</p>

<blockquote>
-3- There are full specializations over the integral types on the <tt>atomic</tt>
class template. For each integral type <tt>integral</tt> in the second column of
table 121 or table 122, the specialization <tt>atomic&lt;integral&gt;</tt> shall be
publicly derived from the corresponding atomic integral type in the first
column of the table.
<ins>In addition, the specialization <tt>atomic&lt;bool&gt;</tt>
shall be publicly derived from <tt>atomic_bool</tt>.</ins>
These specializations shall have trivial default
constructors and trivial destructors.
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="945"></a>945. <tt>system_clock::rep</tt> not specified</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system], the declaration of <tt>system_clock::rep</tt> says "see
below", but there is nothing below that describes it.
</p>

<p><i>[
Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This note refers to:
</p>

<blockquote>
-2- <tt>system_clock::duration::min() &lt; system_clock::duration::zero()</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p>
I.e. this is standardeze for "<tt>system_clock::rep</tt> is signed".
Perhaps an editorial note along the lines of:
</p>

<blockquote>
-2- <tt>system_clock::duration::min() &lt; system_clock::duration::zero()</tt>
shall be <tt>true</tt>. <ins>[<i>Note:</i> <tt>system_clock::rep</tt> shall be signed. <i>-- end note</i>].</ins>
</blockquote>

<p>
?
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the direction of the proposed resolution.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a note to 20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system], p2:
</p>
<blockquote>
-2- <tt>system_clock::duration::min() &lt; system_clock::duration::zero()</tt>
shall be <tt>true</tt>. <ins>[<i>Note:</i> <tt>system_clock::rep</tt> shall be signed. <i>-- end note</i>].</ins>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="946"></a>946. <tt>duration_cast</tt> improperly specified</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <b>Opened:</b> 2008-12-20 <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#time.duration.cast">issues</a> in [time.duration.cast].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast]/3:

<blockquote>
.... All intermediate computations shall be
carried out in the widest possible representation... .
</blockquote>

<p>
So ignoring
floating-point types for the moment, all this arithmetic has to be done
using the implementation's largest integral type, even if both arguments
use int for their representation. This seems excessive. And it's not at
all clear what this means if we don't ignore floating-point types.
</p>

<p>
This issue is related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#952">952</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The intent of this remark is that intermediate computations are carried out
using:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>common_type&lt;typename ToDuration::rep, Rep, intmax_t&gt;::type
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The Remark was intended to be clarifying prose supporting the rather algorithmic description
of the previous paragraph.  I'm open to suggestions.  Perhaps the entire paragraph
3 (Remarks) would be better dropped?
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We view this as a specific case of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#952">952</a>,
and should be resolved when that issue is resolved.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="952"></a>952. Various threading bugs #2</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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.duration.cast">issues</a> in [time.duration.cast].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
20.11.3.7 [time.duration.cast] specifies an implementation and imposes
requirements in text (and the implementation doesn't satisfy all of the
text requirements). Pick one.
</p>

<p>
This issue is related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#946">946</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-10 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The <i>Remarks</i> paragraph is an English re-statement of the preceeding
<i>Returns</i> clause.  It was meant to be clarifying and motivating, not
confusing.  I'm not aware with how the <i>Remarks</i> contradicts the <i>Returns</i> clause
but I'm ok with simply removing the <i>Remarks</i>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Pete suggests that this could be resolved
by rephrasing the Remarks to Notes.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="955"></a>955. Various threading bugs #5</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
20.11.1 [time.clock.req] requires that a clock type have a member
typedef named <tt>time_point</tt> that names an instantiation of the
template <tt>time_point</tt>, and a member named <tt>duration</tt> that
names an instantiation of the template <tt>duration</tt>. This mixing of
levels is confusing. The typedef names should be different from the
template names.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Anthony provided proposed wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-05-04 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The reason that the typedef names were given the same name as the class templates
was so that clients would not have to stop and think about whether they were
using the clock's native <tt>time_point</tt> / <tt>duration</tt> or the class
template directly.  In this case, one person's confusion is another person's
encapsulation.  The detail that sometimes one is referring to the clock's
native types, and sometimes one is referring to an independent type is
<em>purposefully</em> "hidden" because it is supposed to be an unimportant
detail.  It can be confusing to have to remember when to type <tt>duration</tt>
and when to type <tt>duration_type</tt>, and there is no need to require the
client to remember something like that.
</p>

<p>
For example, here is code that I once wrote in testing out the usability of
this facility:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Clock, class Duration&gt;
void do_until(const std::chrono::<b>time_point</b>&lt;Clock, Duration&gt;&amp; t)
{
    typename Clock::<b>time_point now</b> = Clock::now();
    if (t &gt; now)
    {
        typedef typename std::common_type
        &lt;
            Duration,
            typename std::chrono::system_clock::<b>duration</b>
        &gt;::type CD;
        typedef std::chrono::<b>duration</b>&lt;double, std::nano&gt; ID;

        CD d = t - now;
        ID us = duration_cast&lt;ID&gt;(d);
        if (us &lt; d)
            ++us;
        ...
    }
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
I see no rationale to require the client to append <tt>_type</tt> to <em>some</em>
of those declarations.  It seems overly burdensome on the author of <tt>do_until</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Clock, class Duration&gt;
void do_until(const std::chrono::<b>time_point</b>&lt;Clock, Duration&gt;&amp; t)
{
    typename Clock::<b>time_point<font color="#C80000">_type</font></b> now = Clock::now();
    if (t &gt; now)
    {
        typedef typename std::common_type
        &lt;
            Duration,
            typename std::chrono::system_clock::<b>duration<font color="#C80000">_type</font></b>
        &gt;::type CD;
        typedef std::chrono::<b>duration</b>&lt;double, std::nano&gt; ID;

        CD d = t - now;
        ID us = duration_cast&lt;ID&gt;(d);
        if (us &lt; d)
            ++us;
        ...
    }
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Additionally I'm fairly certain that this suggestion hasn't been implemented.
If it had, it would have been discovered that it is incomplete.  <tt>time_point</tt>
also has a nested type (purposefully) named <tt>duration</tt>.
</p>
<blockquote>
That is, the current proposed wording would put the WP into an inconsistent state.
</blockquote>
<p>
In contrast,
the current WP has been implemented and I've received very favorable feedback
from people using this interface in real-world code.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Bill agrees that distinct names should be used for distinct kinds of entities.
</p>
<p>
Walter would prefer not to suffix type names,
especially for such well-understood terms as "duration".
</p>
<p>
Howard reminds us that the proposed resolution is incomplete, per his comment
in the issue.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-06-07 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Not meaning to be argumentative, but we have a decade of positive experience
with the precedent of using the same name for the nested type as an external
class representing an identical concept.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class Category, class T, class Distance = ptrdiff_t,
         class Pointer = T*, class Reference = T&amp;&gt;
struct <b>iterator</b>
{
    ...
};

template &lt;BidirectionalIterator Iter&gt;
class <b>reverse_iterator</b>
{
    ...
};

template &lt;ValueType T, Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;T&gt; &gt;
    requires NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
class list
{
public:
    typedef <i>implementation-defined</i>     <b>iterator</b>;
    ...
    typedef reverse_iterator&lt;iterator&gt; <b>reverse_iterator</b>;
    ...
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
I am aware of <em>zero</em> complaints regarding the use of <tt>iterator</tt>
and <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> as nested types of the containers despite these
names also having related meaning at namespace std scope.
</p>

<p>
Would we really be doing programmers a favor by renaming these nested types?
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;ValueType T, Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;T&gt; &gt;
    requires NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
class list
{
public:
    typedef <i>implementation-defined</i>     <b>iterator_type</b>;
    ...
    typedef reverse_iterator&lt;iterator&gt; <b>reverse_iterator_type</b>;
    ...
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
I submit that such design contributes to needless verbosity which ends up
reducing readability.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD.  No concensus for changing the WP.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 20.11 [time]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>...
template &lt;class Clock, class Duration = typename Clock::duration<ins>_type</ins>&gt; class time_point;
...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 20.11.1 [time.clock.req]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<table border="1">
<caption>Table 45 -- Clock requirements</caption>
<tbody><tr>
<th>Expression</th>
<th>Return type</th>
<th>Operational semantics</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>C1::duration<ins>_type</ins></tt></td>
<td><tt>chrono::duration&lt;C1::rep, C1::period&gt;</tt></td>
<td>The native <tt>duration</tt> type of the clock.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>C1::time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt></td>
<td><tt>chrono::time_point&lt;C1&gt;</tt> or <tt>chrono::time_point&lt;C2, C1::duration<ins>_type</ins>&lt;</tt></td>
<td>The native <tt>time_point</tt> type of the clock.   Different clocks may  share a <tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt>
definition if it is valid to 
compare their <tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt>s by 
comparing their respective 
<tt>duration<ins>_type</ins></tt>s. <tt>C1</tt> and <tt>C2</tt> shall 
refer to the same epoch.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>C1::now()</tt></td>
<td><tt>C1::time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt></td>
<td>Returns a <tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt> object 
representing the current point 
in time.
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 20.11.5.1 [time.clock.system]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1- Objects of class <tt>system_clock</tt> represent wall clock time from the system-wide realtime clock.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class system_clock { 
public: 
  typedef <i>see below</i> rep; 
  typedef ratio&lt;<i>unspecified</i>, <i>unspecified</i>&gt; period; 
  typedef chrono::duration&lt;rep, period&gt; duration<ins>_type</ins>; 
  typedef chrono::time_point&lt;system_clock&gt; time_point<ins>_type</ins>; 
  static const bool is_monotonic = <i>unspecified</i> ; 

  static time_point<ins>_type</ins> now(); 

  // Map to C API 
  static time_t to_time_t (const time_point<ins>_type</ins>&amp; t); 
  static time_point<ins>_type</ins> from_time_t(time_t t); 
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
-2- <tt>system_clock::duration<ins>_type</ins>::min() &lt; system_clock::duration<ins>_type</ins>::zero()</tt> shall be <tt>true</tt>.
</p>

<pre>time_t to_time_t(const time_point<ins>_type</ins>&amp; 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 truncated to the
coarser of the precisions of <tt>time_t</tt> and <tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt>.
</blockquote>

<pre><tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt> from_time_t(time_t t);
</pre>

<blockquote>
-4- <i>Returns:</i> A <tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt> object that represents the same point
in time as <tt>t</tt> when both values are truncated to the coarser of the
precisions of <tt>time_t</tt> and <tt>time_point<ins>_type</ins></tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change X [time.clock.monotonic]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class monotonic_clock { 
public: 
  typedef <i>unspecified</i>                                rep; 
  typedef ratio&lt;<i>unspecified</i> , <i>unspecified</i>&gt;           period; 
  typedef chrono::duration&lt;rep, period&gt;              duration<ins>_type</ins>; 
  typedef chrono::time_point&lt;<i>unspecified</i> , duration<ins>_type</ins>&gt; time_point<ins>_type</ins>; 
  static const bool is_monotonic =                   true; 

  static time_point<ins>_type</ins> now();
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 20.11.5.3 [time.clock.hires]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class high_resolution_clock { 
public: 
  typedef <i>unspecified</i>                                rep; 
  typedef ratio&lt;<i>unspecified</i> , <i>unspecified</i>&gt;           period; 
  typedef chrono::duration&lt;rep, period&gt;              duration<ins>_type</ins>; 
  typedef chrono::time_point&lt;<i>unspecified</i> , duration<ins>_type</ins>&gt; time_point<ins>_type</ins>; 
  static const bool is_monotonic =                   true; 

  static time_point<ins>_type</ins> now();
};
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="958"></a>958. Various threading bugs #8</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar]: the specification for <tt>wait_for</tt>
with no predicate has an effects clause that says it calls <tt>wait_until</tt>,
and a returns clause that sets out in words how to determine the return
value. Is this description of the return value subtly different from the
description of the value returned by <tt>wait_until</tt>? Or should the effects
clause and the returns clause be merged?
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to open. Associate with LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> and any other monotonic-clock
related issues.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-01 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I believe that <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> (currently Ready) addresses this issue, and
that this issue should be marked NAD, solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> (assuming
it moves to WP).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD Editorial, solved by resolution of Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="959"></a>959. Various threading bugs #9</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar]: <tt>condition_variable::wait_for</tt>
is required to compute the absolute time by adding the duration value to
<tt>chrono::monotonic_clock::now()</tt>, but <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is not required to
exist.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to open. Associate with LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> and any other monotonic-clock
related issues.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-01 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I believe that <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> (currently Ready) addresses this issue, and
that this issue should be marked NAD, solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#859">859</a> (assuming
it moves to WP).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave open, but expect to be fixed by N2969 revision that Detlef is writing.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-18 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>condition_variable::wait_for</tt> no longer refers to
<tt>monotonic_clock</tt>, so this issue is moot.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="961"></a>961. Various threading bugs #11</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#936">936</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements] describes required member
functions of mutex types, and requires that they throw exceptions under
certain circumstances. This is overspecified. User-defined types can
abort on such errors without affecting the operation of templates
supplied by standard-library.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to open. Related to conceptualization and should probably be
tackled as part of that.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Would be OK to leave it as is for time constraints, could loosen later.
</p>

<p>
Mark as NAD Future.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="969"></a>969. What happened to Library Issue 475?</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-12 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#475">475</a> has CD1 status, but the non-normative note in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>
was removed in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>
(25.2.4 [alg.foreach] in both drafts).
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Restore the non-normative note. It might need to be expressed in terms of concepts.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="971"></a>971. Spurious diagnostic conversion function</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.2.5 [syserr.errcode.nonmembers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Beman Dawes <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-19 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Anthony Williams raised the question in c++std-lib-22987 "why is there
<tt>std::make_error_code(std::errc)</tt>? What purpose does this serve?"
</p>
<p>
The function <tt>make_error_code(errc e)</tt> is not required, since
<tt>make_error_condition(errc e)</tt> is the function that is needed for <tt>errc</tt>
conversions. <tt>make_error_code(errc e)</tt> appears to be a holdover from my
initial confusion over the distinction between POSIX and operating
systems that conform to the POSIX spec.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend Review.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
The designer of the facility (Christopher Kohlhoff)
strongly disagrees that there is an issue here,
and especially disagrees with the proposed resolution.
Bill would prefer to be conservative and not apply this proposed resolution.
Move to Open, and recommend strong consideration for NAD status.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-21 Beman adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
My mistake. Christopher and Bill are correct and the issue should be
NAD. The function is needed by users.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-21 Christopher Kohlhoff adds rationale for <tt>make_error_code</tt>:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Users (and indeed library implementers) may need to use the
<tt>errc</tt> codes in portable code. For example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void do_foo(error_code&amp; ec)
{
#if defined(_WIN32)
  // Windows implementation ...
#elif defined(linux)
  // Linux implementation ...
#else
  // do_foo not supported on this platform
  ec = make_error_code(errc::not_supported);
#endif
}
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change System error support 19.5 [syserr], Header <tt>&lt;system_error&gt;</tt>
synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>error_code make_error_code(errc e);</del>
error_condition make_error_condition(errc e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Delete from Class error_code non-member functions
19.5.2.5 [syserr.errcode.nonmembers]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>error_code make_error_code(errc e);</del>
</pre>
<blockquote>
<del><i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_code(static_cast&lt;int&gt;(e),
generic_category)</tt>.</del>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="972"></a>972. The term "Assignable" undefined but still in use</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-07 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Previous versions of the Draft had a table, defining the Assignable 
requirement.  For example 
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2134.pdf">N2134</a>
Table 79, "Assignable requirements". But I guess the term "Assignable" 
is outdated by now, because the current Committee Draft provides 
<tt>MoveAssignable</tt>, <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, and <tt>TriviallyCopyAssignable</tt> concepts 
instead. And as far as I can see, it no longer has a definition of 
<tt>Assignable</tt>. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) Still the word 
"Assignable" is used in eight places in the Draft, 
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2800.pdf">N2800</a>.
</p>

<p>
Are all of those instances of "<tt>Assignable</tt>" to be replaced by "<tt>CopyAssignable</tt>"? 
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Change Exception Propagation 18.8.5 [propagation]:
</p>
<blockquote>
<tt>exception_ptr</tt> shall be <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt>, <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>,
<tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt> and <tt>EqualityComparable</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p>
Change Class template reference_wrapper 20.8.4 [refwrap]:
</p>
<blockquote>
<tt>reference_wrapper&lt;T&gt;</tt> is a <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt> wrapper around a reference to an object of type <tt>T</tt>.
</blockquote>
<p>
Change Placeholders 20.8.10.1.3 [func.bind.place]:
</p>
<blockquote>
It is implementation defined whether placeholder types are <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt>. <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt> placeholders' copy assignment operators shall not throw exceptions.
</blockquote>
<p>
Change Class template shared_ptr 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]:
</p>
<blockquote>
Specializations of <tt>shared_ptr</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt>, and <tt>LessThanComparable</tt>...
</blockquote>
<p>
Change Class template weak_ptr 20.9.10.3 [util.smartptr.weak]:
</p>
<blockquote>
Specializations of <tt>weak_ptr</tt> shall be <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>, <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt>, and <tt>LessThanComparable</tt>...
</blockquote>
<p>
Change traits typedefs 21.2.2 [char.traits.typedefs] (note: including deletion of reference to 23.1!):
</p>
<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>state_type</tt> shall meet the requirements of <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt><del> (23.1)</del>, <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (20.1.8), and <tt>DefaultConstructible</tt> types.
</blockquote>
<p>
Change Class seed_seq 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq] (note again: including deletion of reference to 23.1!):
</p>
<blockquote>
In addition to the requirements set forth below, instances of
<tt>seed_seq</tt> shall meet the requirements of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> (20.1.8) and of <tt><ins>Copy</ins>Assignable</tt><del> (23.1)</del>.
</blockquote>

<p>
Note: The proposed resolution of this issue does not deal with the
instance of the term "Assignable" in D.12.1 [auto.ptr], as this is dealt
with more specifically by LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#973">973</a>, "<tt>auto_ptr</tt> characteristics", submitted
by Maarten Hilferink.
</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="973"></a>973. auto_ptr characteristics</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Maarten Hilferink <b>Opened:</b> 2009-01-21 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I think that the Note of D.12.1 [auto.ptr], paragraph 3 needs a rewrite 
since "Assignable" is no longer defined as a concept. 
The relationship of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> with the new <tt>CopyAssignable</tt>, <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>,
 and <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> concepts should be clarified.
Furthermore, since the use of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> is depreciated anyway,
 we can also omit a description of its intended use.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the intent of the proposed resolution.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change D.12.1 [auto.ptr], paragraph 3:
</p>

<blockquote>
The <tt>auto_ptr</tt> provides a semantics of strict ownership. An
<tt>auto_ptr</tt> owns the ob ject it holds a pointer to. Copying an
<tt>auto_ptr</tt> copies the pointer and transfers ownership to the
destination. If more than one <tt>auto_ptr</tt> owns the same ob ject at
the same time the behavior of the program is undefined. [<i>Note:</i>
The uses of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> include providing temporary
exception-safety for dynamically allocated memory, passing ownership of
dynamically allocated memory to a function, and returning dynamically
allocated memory from a function.
<del><tt>auto_ptr</tt> does not meet the
<tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and <tt>Assignable</tt> requirements for
standard library container elements and thus instantiating a standard
library container with an <tt>auto_ptr</tt> results in undefined
behavior.</del>

<ins>Instances of <tt>auto_ptr</tt> shall
meet the <tt>MoveConstructible</tt> and <tt>MoveAssignable</tt>
requirements, but do not meet the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> and
<tt>CopyAssignable</tt> requirements.</ins>
-- <i>end note</i>]
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="976"></a>976. Class template std::stack should be movable</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-01 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The synopsis given in 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn] does not show up
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires MoveConstructible&lt;Cont&gt; stack(stack&amp;&amp;);
requires MoveAssignable&lt;Cont&gt; stack&amp; operator=(stack&amp;&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
although the other container adaptors do provide corresponding
members.
</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
tweaked for concepts removal.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-18 Daniel updates the wording and Howard sets to Review.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-08-23 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a> also adds these move members using an editorially different
style.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark NAD Editorial, solved by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In the class stack synopsis of 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn] insert:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Container = deque&lt;T&gt; &gt;
class stack {
  [..]
  explicit stack(const Container&amp;);
  explicit stack(Container&amp;&amp; = Container());
  <ins>stack(stack&amp;&amp; s) : c(std::move(s.c)) {}</ins>
  <ins>stack&amp; operator=(stack&amp;&amp; s) { c = std::move(s.c); return *this; }</ins>
  [..]
};
</pre></blockquote>








<hr>
<h3><a name="977"></a>977. insert iterators inefficient for expensive to move types</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2 [insert.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <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#insert.iterators">issues</a> in [insert.iterators].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The new concepts for the insert iterators mandate an extra copy when
inserting an lvalue:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;
  back_insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
  operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
-1- <i>Effects:</i> <tt>push_back(*container, <b>Cont::value_type(</b>value<b>)</b>);</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
The reason is to convert <tt>value</tt> into an rvalue because the current
<tt>BackInsertionContainer</tt> concept only handles <tt>push_back</tt>-ing
rvalues:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept BackInsertionContainer&lt;typename C&gt; : Container&lt;C&gt; { 
  void push_back(C&amp;, value_type&amp;&amp;); 
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Without the conversion of <tt>value</tt> to an rvalue, the assignment operator
fails to concept check.
</p>

<p>
A solution is to modify the <tt>BackInsertionContainer</tt> concept so that
the client can pass in the parameter type for <tt>push_back</tt> similar to
what is already done for the <tt>OutputIterator</tt> concept:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept BackInsertionContainer&lt;typename C, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;&gt;
  : Container&lt;C&gt; { 
     void push_back(C&amp;, Value); 
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This allows the assignment operator to be adjusted appropriately:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires BackInsertionContainer&lt;Cont, Cont::value_type const&amp;&gt; &amp;&amp;
         CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;
  back_insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
  operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
-1- <i>Effects:</i> <tt>push_back(*container, value);</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
We may want to propagate this fix to other concepts such as <tt>StackLikeContainer</tt>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Solution and wording collaborated on by Doug and Howard.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Howard notes that "these operations behaved efficiently until concepts were added."
</p>
<p>
Alisdair is uncertain that the proposed resolution is syntactically correct.
</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 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD, solved by the removal of concepts.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change  [container.concepts.free]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>concept FrontInsertionContainer&lt;typename C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt;
    : Container&lt;C&gt; { 
  void push_front(C&amp;, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>); 

  axiom FrontInsertion(C c, <del>value_type</del> <ins>Value</ins> x) { 
    x == (push_front(c, x), front(c)); 
  } 
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>

<pre>concept BackInsertionContainer&lt;typename C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt;
    : Container&lt;C&gt; { 
  void push_back(C&amp;, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>); 
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>

<pre>concept InsertionContainer&lt;typename C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt;
    : Container&lt;C&gt; { 
  iterator insert(C&amp;, const_iterator, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>); 

  axiom Insertion(C c, const_iterator position, <del>value_type</del> <ins>Value</ins> v) { 
    v == *insert(c, position, v); 
  } 
}
</pre>

</blockquote>

<p>
Change  [container.concepts.member]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>auto concept MemberFrontInsertionContainer&lt;typename C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt;
    : MemberContainer&lt;C&gt; { 
  void C::push_front(<del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>); 

  axiom MemberFrontInsertion(C c, <del>value_type</del> <ins>Value</ins> x) { 
    x == (c.push_front(x), c.front()); 
  } 
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>

<pre>auto concept MemberBackInsertionContainer&lt;typename C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt;
    : MemberContainer&lt;C&gt; { 
  void C::push_back(<del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>); 
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>

<pre>auto concept MemberInsertionContainer&lt;typename C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt;
    : MemberContainer&lt;C&gt; { 
  iterator C::insert(const_iterator, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>); 

  axiom MemberInsertion(C c, const_iterator position, <del>value_type</del> <ins>Value</ins> v) { 
    v == *c.insert(position, v); 
  } 
}
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change  [container.concepts.maps]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>template &lt;MemberFrontInsertionContainer C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt; 
concept_map FrontInsertionContainer&lt;C<ins>, Value</ins>&gt; { 
  typedef Container&lt;C&gt;::value_type value_type;

  void push_front(C&amp; c, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins> v) { c.push_front(static_cast&lt;<del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>&gt;(v)); } 
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>

<pre>template &lt;MemberBackInsertionContainer C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt; 
concept_map BackInsertionContainer&lt;C<ins>, Value</ins>&gt; { 
  typedef Container&lt;C&gt;::value_type value_type;

  void push_back(C&amp; c, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins> v) { c.push_back(static_cast&lt;<del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>&gt;(v)); } 
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>

<pre>template &lt;MemberInsertionContainer C<ins>, typename Value = C::value_type&amp;&amp;</ins>&gt; 
concept_map InsertionContainer&lt;C<ins>, Value</ins>&gt; { 
  typedef Container&lt;C&gt;::value_type value_type;
  Container&lt;C&gt;::iterator insert(C&amp; c, Container&lt;C&gt;::const_iterator i, <del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins> v) 
  { return c.insert(i, static_cast&lt;<del>value_type&amp;&amp;</del> <ins>Value</ins>&gt;(v)); } 
}
</pre>

</blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.2.1 [back.insert.iterator]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;BackInsertionContainer Cont&gt; 
class back_insert_iterator {
  ...
  requires <ins>BackInsertionContainer&lt;Cont, const Cont::value_type&amp;&gt;</ins>
           <del>CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;</del>
    back_insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
      operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
  ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.2.2.2 [back.insert.iter.op=]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>requires <ins>BackInsertionContainer&lt;Cont, const Cont::value_type&amp;&gt;</ins>
         <del>CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;</del>
  back_insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
    operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
-1- <i>Effects:</i> <tt>push_back(*container, <del>Cont::value_type(</del>value<del>)</del>);</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.2.3 [front.insert.iterator]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;FrontInsertionContainer Cont&gt; 
class front_insert_iterator {
  ...
  requires <ins>FrontInsertionContainer&lt;Cont, const Cont::value_type&amp;&gt;</ins>
           <del>CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;</del>
    front_insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
      operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
  ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.2.4.2 [front.insert.iter.op=]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>requires <ins>FrontInsertionContainer&lt;Cont, const Cont::value_type&amp;&gt;</ins>
         <del>CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;</del>
  front_insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
    operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
-1- <i>Effects:</i> <tt>push_front(*container, <del>Cont::value_type(</del>value<del>)</del>);</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.2.5 [insert.iterator]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;InsertionContainer Cont&gt; 
class insert_iterator {
  ...
  requires <ins>InsertionContainer&lt;Cont, const Cont::value_type&amp;&gt;</ins>
           <del>CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;</del>
    insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
      operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
  ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.2.6.2 [insert.iter.op=]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>requires <ins>InsertionContainer&lt;Cont, const Cont::value_type&amp;&gt;</ins>
         <del>CopyConstructible&lt;Cont::value_type&gt;</del>
  insert_iterator&lt;Cont&gt;&amp; 
    operator=(const Cont::value_type&amp; value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-1- <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>iter = insert(*container, iter, <del>Cont::value_type(</del>value<del>)</del>); 
++iter;
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="979"></a>979. Bad example</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.3 [move.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-03 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
24.5.3 [move.iterators] has an incorrect example:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-2- [<i>Example:</i>
</p>

<blockquote><pre>set&lt;string&gt; s; 
// populate the set s 
vector&lt;string&gt; v1(s.begin(), s.end());          // copies strings into v1 
vector&lt;string&gt; v2(make_move_iterator(s.begin()), 
                  make_move_iterator(s.end())); // moves strings into v2
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
<i>-- end example</i>]
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
One can not move from a <tt>set</tt> because the iterators return <tt>const</tt>
references.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the proposed resolution. Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 24.5.3 [move.iterators]/2:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-2- [<i>Example:</i>
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>set</del><ins>list</ins>&lt;string&gt; s; 
// populate the <del>set</del><ins>list</ins> s 
vector&lt;string&gt; v1(s.begin(), s.end());          // copies strings into v1 
vector&lt;string&gt; v2(make_move_iterator(s.begin()), 
                  make_move_iterator(s.end())); // moves strings into v2
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
<i>-- end example</i>]
</p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="980"></a>980. <tt>mutex lock()</tt> missing error conditions</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ion Gazta�aga <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-07 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
POSIX 2008 adds two return values for <tt>pthread_mutex_xxxlock()</tt>:
<tt>EOWNERDEAD</tt> (<tt>owner_dead</tt>) and <tt>ENOTRECOVERABLE</tt>
(<tt>state_not_recoverable</tt>). In the first case the mutex is locked,
in the second case the mutex is not locked.
</p>

<p>
Throwing an exception in the first case can be incompatible with the use
of Locks, since the <tt>Lock::owns_lock()</tt> will be <tt>false</tt> when the lock is
being destroyed.
</p>

<p>
Consider:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>//Suppose mutex.lock() throws "owner_dead"
unique_lock ul(&amp;mutex);
//mutex left locked if "owner_dead" is thrown
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Throwing an exception with <tt>owner_dead</tt> might be also undesirable if
robust-mutex support is added to C++ and the user has the equivalent of
<tt>pthread_mutex_consistent()</tt> to notify the user has fixed the corrupted
data and the mutex state should be marked consistent.
</p>

<ol>
<li>
For <tt>state_not_recoverable</tt> add it to the list of Error conditions:
</li>
<li>
For <tt>owner_dead</tt>, no proposed resolution.
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Not a defect. Handling these error conditions is an implementation
detail and must be handled below the C++ interface.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Add to 30.4.1 [thread.mutex.requirements], p12:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-12- <i>Error conditions:</i>
</p>

<ul>
<li>
<tt>operation_not_permitted</tt> -- if the thread does not have the necessary permission to change 
the state of the mutex.
</li>
<li>
<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> -- if the current thread already owns the mutex and is able 
to detect it.
</li>
<li>
<tt>device_or_resource_busy</tt> --  if the mutex is already locked and blocking is not possible.
</li>
<li>
<ins><tt>state_not_recoverable</tt> -- if the state protected by the mutex is not recoverable.</ins>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="988"></a>988. <tt>Reflexivity</tt> meaningless?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [concept.comparison] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-24 <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#concept.comparison">issues</a> in [concept.comparison].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
X [concept.comparison] p2:
</p>
<p>
Due to the subtle meaning of <tt>==</tt> inside axioms, the <tt>Reflexivity</tt> axiom does
not do anything as written. It merely states that a value is substitutable
with itself, rather than asserting a property of the <tt>==</tt> operator.
</p>

<b>
Original proposed resolution:
</b>

<p>
Change the definition of <tt>Reflexivity</tt> in X [concept.comparison]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>axiom Reflexivity(T a) { <ins>(</ins>a == a<ins>) == true</ins>; }
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair: I was wrong.
</p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
NAD.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="989"></a>989. late_check and 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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-24 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The example in 6.9p2 shows how late_check blocks inhibit concept_map lookup
inside a constrained context, and so inhibit concept map adaption by users
to meet template requirements.
</p>
<p>
Do we need some text in clause 17 prohibitting use of late_check in library
template definitions unless otherwise documented?
</p>

<p><i>[
Doug adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We need something like this, but it should be a more general statement
about implementations respecting the concept maps provided by the
user. Use of late_check is one way in which implementations can
subvert the concept maps provided by the user, but there are other
ways as well ("pattern-based" overloading, tricks with "auto" concept
maps and defaulted associated type arguments).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, pending proposed wording from Alisdair and/or Doug for further review.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="992"></a>992. Response to UK 169</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 169</b></p>
<p>
This phrasing contradicts later freedom to implement the C standard
library portions in the global namespace as well as std. (17.6.2.3p4)
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
The proposed wording seems to go too far.
Move back to Open.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Howard to add NB reference to the description of this issue.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD. This comment is informative and not normative by the use of
the word "are" instead of the word "shall."
</p>
<p>
A note linking to Annex D would help clarify the intention, here.
</p>
<p>
Robert to Open a separate issue proposing that the standard C headers be
undeprecated, for the purpose of clarifying the standard.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-22 Bill modified the proposed wording with a clarifying footnote.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a footnote to 17.6.1.1 [contents], p2:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-2- 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><sup>*</sup></ins>.
</p>

<p><ins>
<sup>*</sup>The C standard library headers D.7 [depr.c.headers] also define
names within the global namespace, while the C++ headers for
C library facilities 17.6.1.2 [headers] may also define names within
the global namespace.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="995"></a>995. Operational Semantics Unclear</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.1.3 [structure.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-06 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
As a practical matter there's disagreement on the meaning of <i>operational
semantics</i>.  If the text in 17.5.1.3 [structure.requirements]p4 isn't
clear, it should be clarified.  However, it's not clear whether the
disagreement is merely due to people not being aware of the text.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Agree with the recommended NAD resolution.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.  The text in 17.5.1.3 [structure.requirements] is
perfectly clear.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="996"></a>996. Move operation not well 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-06 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There are lots of places in the standard where we talk about "the move
constructor" but where we mean "the move operation," i.e.  <tt>T( move( x ) )</tt>.
</p>
<p>
We also don't account for whether that operation modifies <tt>x</tt> or not, and
we need to.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, pending proposed wording from Dave for further
review.
</blockquote>



<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD.  We define what we expect from a moved-from object in Table 34 [movesconstructible].
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1000"></a>1000. adjacent_find is over-constrained</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Chris Jefferson <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-09 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<b>Addresses UK 296</b>
</p>

<p>
<tt>adjacent_find</tt> in C++03 allows an arbitrary predicate, but in C++0x
<tt>EqualityComparable/EquivalenceRelation</tt> is required. This forbids a
number of use cases, including:
</p>
<blockquote>
<table>
<tbody><tr>
<td valign="top">
<tt>adjacent_find(begin,&nbsp;end,&nbsp;less&lt;double&gt;)</tt>
</td>
<td>
Find the first
place where a range is not ordered in decreasing order - in use to check
for sorted ranges.
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<tt>adjacent_find(begin,&nbsp;end,&nbsp;DistanceBiggerThan(6)&nbsp;)&nbsp;)</tt>
</td>
<td>
Find the first
place in a range where values differ by more than a given value - in use
to check an algorithm which produces points in space does not generate
points too far apart.
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
A number of books use predicate which are not equivalence relations in
examples, including "Thinking in C++" and "C++ Primer".
</p>

<p>
Adding the requirement that the predicate is an <tt>EquivalenceRelation</tt>
does not appear to open up any possibility for a more optimised algorithm.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the definition of adjacent_find in the synopsis of 25 [algorithms]
and 25.2.8 [alg.adjacent.find] to:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter&gt; 
  requires <del>EqualityComparable</del><ins>HasEqualTo</ins>&lt;Iter::value_type<ins>, Iter::value_type</ins>&gt;
  Iter adjacent_find(Iter first, Iter last);

template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, <del>EquivalenceRelation</del><ins>Predicate</ins>&lt;auto, Iter::value_type<ins>, Iter::value_type</ins>&gt; Pred&gt; 
  requires CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt; 
  Iter adjacent_find(Iter first, Iter last, Pred pred);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1001"></a>1001. Pointers, concepts and 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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-10 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 78</b></p>

<p>
Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1063">1063</a>.
</p>

<p>
This is effectively an extension of LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#343">343</a>.
</p>
<p>
We know there is an increasing trend (encouraged by conformance testers and
some users) that each library header should supply no more than required to
satisfy the synopsis in the standard.  This is typically achieved by
breaking larger headers into smaller subsets, and judicious use of forward
declarations.
</p>
<p>
If we apply this policy to C++0x (per
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2800.pdf">N2800</a>)
it will be very surprising for
people using library algorithms over ranges defined by pointers that they
must <tt>#include &lt;iterator_concepts&gt;</tt> for their code to compile again.  That is
because pointers do not satisfy any of the iterator concepts without the
<tt>concept_map</tt> supplied in this header.
</p>
<p>
Therefore, I suggest we should require all library headers that make use of
iterator concepts are specifically required to <tt>#include &lt;iterator_concepts&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p>
At a minimum, the list of headers would be: (assuming all are constrained by
concepts)
</p>
<blockquote><pre>algorithm
array
deque
forward_list
initializer_list
iterator
locale
list
map
memory          // if <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1029">1029</a> is adopted
memory_concepts
numeric
random
regex
set
string
tuple
unordered_map
unordered_set
utility
vector
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Ganesh adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The same problems exists for <tt>&lt;memory_concepts&gt;</tt> and
<tt>&lt;container_concepts&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p>
In order to compile <tt>&lt;vector&gt;</tt> you just need the
definitions of the concepts in <tt>&lt;memory_concepts&gt;</tt>, the
concept maps defined there are not necessary. Yet, from the user point
of view, if the concept map template for <tt>AllocatableElement</tt> are
not in scope, <tt>&lt;vector&gt;</tt> is pretty useless. Same for
<tt>&lt;tuple&gt;</tt> and <tt>ConstructibleWithAllocator</tt>.
</p>
<p>
Similarly, <tt>&lt;queue&gt;</tt> is not very useful if the concept map
template for <tt>QueueLikeContainer</tt> is not in scope, although the
definition of concept alone is theoretically sufficient.
</p>
<p>
There's a pattern here: if a concept has concept maps "attached", they
should never be separated.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Beman provided the proposed resolution for the May 2009 mailing. He 
comments:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>

<p>Initially I tried to specify exactly what header should include what other 
headers. This was verbose, error prone, hard to maintain, and appeared to add 
little value compared to just stating the general rule.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Pete believes the proposed wording overconstrains implementers.
Instead of specifying the mechanism,
he prefers a solution that spells out what needs to be declared,
rather than how those declarations are to be provided,
e.g.,
</p>
<blockquote>
A C++ header shall provide the names
that are required to be defined in that header.
</blockquote>
<p>
Bill suggests approaching the wording from a programmer's perspective.
We may want to consider promising that certain widely-used headers
(e.g., the concept headers) are included when needed by other headers.
He feels, however, there is nothing broken now,
although we may want to consider "something nicer."
</p>
<p>
Move to Open status.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-06-16 Beman updated the proposed resolution:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
  <ul>
    <li>The mechanism is no longer specified, as requested in Batavia.</li>
    <li>The footnote has been removed since it specified mechanism and also did 
    not reflect existing practice.</li>
    <li>A sentence was added that makes it clear that the existing practice is 
    permitted.</li>
  </ul>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-15 Beman updated the proposed resolution:
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07-17 Beman updated the proposed resolution based on feedback from the LWG in Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Strike two pieces of text considered unnecessary.</li>
<li>Change "definitions" to "declarations and definitions" in two places.</li>
<li>Wording tightened slightly.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Revised Proposed Resolution:
</p>
<p>
A C++ header may include other C++ headers. 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.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair: Does this address the BSI comment?
</p>
<p>
Beman: There were several overlapping comments. I tried to handle them
all with one resolution.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair: I'd prefer to see this closed as NAD and have this resolution
be the subject of some other, new issue.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Concepts. Howard to open a new issue (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1178">1178</a>) in Ready state with the
Proposed Resolution above. Beman will write up a discussion for the new
issue.
</p>
</blockquote>



<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 same declarations and definitions as
if those other headers were included.</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="1002"></a>1002. Response to UK 170</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 170</b></p>

<p>
One of goals of C++0x is to make language easier to teach and for
'incidental' programmers. The fine-grained headers of the C++ library
are valuable in large scale systems for managing dependencies and
optimising build times, but overcomplicated for simple development and
tutorials. Add additional headers to support the whole library through a
single include statement.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We do not all agree that this is an issue,
but we agree that if it needs solving this is the right way to do it.
Move to Tentatively Ready.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-06 Beman notes:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This issue
adds a header <tt>&lt;std&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p>
There is a paper to be looked at,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2905.pdf">N2905</a>
Aggregation headers, that adds
a header <tt>&lt;std-all&gt;</tt> that is the same thing except it excludes
deprecated headers.
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2905.pdf">N2905</a>
also proposes a second aggregation header.
</p>
<p>
Seems like this issue should be held in abeyance until the LWG has had
a chance to look at <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2905.pdf">N2905</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-06 Howard:  I've pulled this issue back to Review.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
No consensus for change.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Insert a new paragraph in 17.6.1.2 [headers] between p4 and p5
</p>
<blockquote>
An additional header <tt>&lt;std&gt;</tt> shall have the effect of
supplying the entire standard library.  [<i>Note:</i> for example, it
might be implemented as a file with an <tt>#include</tt> statement for each of the
headers listed in tables 13 and 14. <i>-- end note</i>]
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1003"></a>1003. Response to JP 23</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 23</b></p>

<p>
There is a freestanding implementation including
<tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt>, <tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt>,
<tt>&lt;ratio&gt;</tt>, lately added to Table 13, C++ library headers.
Programmers think them useful and hope that these headers are also added
to Table 15, C++ headers for freestanding implementations, that shows
the set of headers which a freestanding implementation shall include at
least.
</p>

<p><b>Original proposed resolution</b></p>

<p>
Add <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt>, <tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt>,
<tt>&lt;ratio&gt;</tt> to Table 15.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
 The <tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt> header has far too many dependencies to require for a
free-standing implementation.
</p>
<p>
The <tt>&lt;ratio&gt;</tt> header would be useful, has no dependencies, but is not
strictly necessary.
</p>
<p>
The <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt> header is fundamentally a core language facility with a
library interface, so should be supported.
</p>

<p>
(it is anticipated the resolution will come via an update to paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2814.pdf">N2814</a>)
(see also LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#833">833</a>)
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Leave in Review status pending a paper on freestanding implementations
by Martin Tasker.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Move this to NAD.
</p>
<p>
We considered all of the listed headers, and found a compelling case
only for the inclusion of <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt> in the list of headers required
of a freestanding implementation.
</p>
<p>
See Martin Tasker's paper 
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2932.pdf">Fixing Freestanding</a>
which provides the wording to include <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt> into freestanding
implementations.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt> to Table 15.
</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1005"></a>1005. <tt>numeric_limits</tt> partial specializations not concept enabled</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 18.3.1.1 [numeric.limits] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 26</b></p>

<p>
<tt>numeric_limits</tt> [partial specializations] does not use concept.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Alisdair will provide a soltion as part of treatment of axioms and LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#902">902</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Alisdair recommends NAD as the partial specializations are already
constrained by requirements on the primary template.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
The Working Draft does not in general repeat a primary template's constraints
in any specializations.
Move to NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-25 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
A c++std-lib thread starting at c++std-lib-23880 has cast doubt that NAD is the
correct resolution of this issue.  Indeed the discussion also casts doubt that
the current proposed wording is the correct resolution as well.  Personally I'm
inclined to reset the status to Open.  However I'm reverting the status to 
that which it had prior to the Batavia recommendation.  I'm setting back to Review.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 18.3.1.1 [numeric.limits]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;<del>class</del> <ins>Regular</ins> T&gt; class numeric_limits&lt;const T&gt;;
template&lt;<del>class</del> <ins>Regular</ins> T&gt; class numeric_limits&lt;volatile T&gt;;
template&lt;<del>class</del> <ins>Regular</ins> T&gt; class numeric_limits&lt;const volatile T&gt;;
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1007"></a>1007. <tt>throw_with_nested</tt> not concept enabled</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 29</b></p>

<p>
<tt>throw_with_nested</tt> does not use concept.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

 
<blockquote>
Agreed.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Alisdair initially proposed wording in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2619.pdf">N2619</a>.
</p>
<p>
We are awaiting an updated paper based on feedback from the San Francisco
review.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1008"></a>1008. <tt>nested_exception</tt> wording unclear</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 31</b></p>

<p>
It is difficult to understand in which case <tt>nested_exception</tt> is applied.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

 
<blockquote>
Alisdair will add an example in an update to
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2619.pdf">N2619</a>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
It doesn't appear that N2619 really addresses this. Alisdair to propose wording.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark issue 1008 as NAD, the type is adequately described.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
nested_exception is intended to be inherited from by exception classes
that are to be thrown during the handling of another exception, i.e.
when translating from one exception type to another. nested_exception
allows the originally thrown exception to be easily retained in that
scenario.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1009"></a>1009. <tt>InputIterator</tt> post-increment dangerous</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2.2 [iterator.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 251</b></p>

<p>
The post-increment operator is dangerous for a general InputIterator.
The multi-pass guarantees that make it meaningful are defined as part of
the ForwardIterator refinement. Any change will affect only constrained
templates that have not yet been written, so should not break existing
user iterators which remain free to add these operations. This change
will also affect the generalised OutputIterator, although there is no
percieved need for the post-increment operator in this case either.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07-28 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We still think the issue is relevant, but needs totally rewording in
non-concept language.  We would like to see the issue retained as Open,
rather than deferred as NAD Concepts.  Review status is no longer
appropriate.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD.  Without concepts we do not feel that input iterator post increment
is broken.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 24.2.2 [iterator.iterators]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept Iterator&lt;typename X&gt; : Semiregular&lt;X&gt; { 
  MoveConstructible reference = typename X::reference; 
  <del>MoveConstructible postincrement_result;</del>

  <del>requires HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;;</del>

  reference operator*(X&amp;&amp;); 
  X&amp; operator++(X&amp;); 
  <del>postincrement_result operator++(X&amp;, int);</del>
}
</pre>

<p>...</p>
<pre><del>postincrement_result operator++(X&amp; r, int);</del>
</pre>

<blockquote>
<del>-3- <i>Effects:</i> equivalent to <tt>{ X tmp = r; ++r; return tmp; }</tt>.</del>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.2.3 [input.iterators]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>concept InputIterator&lt;typename X&gt; : Iterator&lt;X&gt;, EqualityComparable&lt;X&gt; { 
  ObjectType value_type = typename X::value_type; 
  MoveConstructible pointer = typename X::pointer; 

  SignedIntegralLike difference_type = typename X::difference_type; 

  requires IntegralType&lt;difference_type&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;reference, const value_type &amp;&gt;; 
        &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;pointer, const value_type*&gt;; 

  <del>requires Convertible&lt;HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;::result_type, const value_type&amp;&gt;;</del>

  pointer operator-&gt;(const X&amp;); 
}
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.2.4 [output.iterators]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>auto concept OutputIterator&lt;typename X, typename Value&gt; { 
  requires Iterator&lt;X&gt;; 

  typename reference = Iterator&lt;X&gt;::reference; 
  <del>typename postincrement_result = Iterator&lt;X&gt;::postincrement_result;</del>
  requires SameType&lt;reference, Iterator&lt;X&gt;::reference&gt; 
        <del>&amp;&amp; SameType&lt;postincrement_result, Iterator&lt;X&gt;::postincrement_result&gt;</del>
        <del>&amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;postincrement_result, const X&amp;&gt;</del>
        &amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt;reference, Value&gt; 
        <del>&amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt;HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;::result_type, Value&gt;</del>;
}
</pre>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.2.5 [forward.iterators]:
</p>

<p><i>[
See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1084">1084</a> which is attempting to change this same area in a compatible
way.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<pre>concept ForwardIterator&lt;typename X&gt; : InputIterator&lt;X&gt;, Regular&lt;X&gt; { 
  <del>requires Convertible&lt;postincrement_result, const X&amp;&gt;;</del>

  <ins>MoveConstructible postincrement_result;</ins>
  <ins>requires HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;
        &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;::result_type, const value_type&amp;&gt;;</ins>

  <ins>postincrement_result operator++(X&amp;, int);</ins>

  axiom MultiPass(X a, X b) { 
    if (a == b) *a == *b; 
    if (a == b) ++a == ++b; 
  } 
}
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>-4- ...</p>
</blockquote>

<pre><ins>postincrement_result operator++(X&amp; r, int);</ins>
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
<ins>-5- <i>Effects:</i> equivalent to <tt>{ X tmp = r; ++r; return tmp; }</tt>.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1010"></a>1010. <tt>operator-=</tt> should use default in concept</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 263</b></p>

<p>
This requirement on <tt>operator-=</tt> would be better expressed as a default
implementation in the concept, with a matching axiom.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
The proposed resolution should also remove
paragraph 5 and the declaration that precedes it.
Further, we should provide an axiom
that captures the desired semantics.
This may be a broader policy to be applied.
Move to Open.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept RandomAccessIterator&lt;typename X&gt; : BidirectionalIterator&lt;X&gt;, LessThanComparable&lt;X&gt; {
  ...
  X&amp; operator-=(X&amp; <ins>x</ins>, difference_type <ins>n</ins>)<ins> { return x += -n</ins>;<ins> }</ins>
  ...
}
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1013"></a>1013. Response to UK 305</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 305</b></p>

<p>
The negative requirement on <tt>IsSameType</tt> is a hold-over from an earlier
draught with a variadic template form of <tt>min/max</tt> algorith. It is no
longer necessary.
</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>
We believe this is NAD, but this needs to be reviewed against the
post-remove-concepts draft.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 25 [algorithms]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class T, StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt; Compare&gt;
  <del>requires !SameType&lt;T, Compare&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;</del>
  const T&amp; min(const T&amp; a, const T&amp; b, Compare comp);
...
template&lt;class T, StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt; Compare&gt;
  <del>requires !SameType&lt;T, Compare&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;</del>
  const T&amp; max(const T&amp; a, const T&amp; b, Compare comp);
...
template&lt;class T, StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt; Compare&gt;
  <del>requires !SameType&lt;T, Compare&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;</del>
  pair&lt;const T&amp;, const T&amp;&gt; minmax(const T&amp; a, const T&amp; b, Compare comp);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 25.4.7 [alg.min.max], p1, p9 and p17:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class T, StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt; Compare&gt;
  <del>requires !SameType&lt;T, Compare&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;</del>
  const T&amp; min(const T&amp; a, const T&amp; b, Compare comp);
...
template&lt;class T, StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt; Compare&gt;
  <del>requires !SameType&lt;T, Compare&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;</del>
  const T&amp; max(const T&amp; a, const T&amp; b, Compare comp);
...
template&lt;class T, StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, T&gt; Compare&gt;
  <del>requires !SameType&lt;T, Compare&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;</del>
  pair&lt;const T&amp;, const T&amp;&gt; minmax(const T&amp; a, const T&amp; b, Compare comp);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1015"></a>1015. Response to UK 199</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [concept.transform] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#concept.transform">issues</a> in [concept.transform].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 199</b></p>

<p>
The requirement that programs do not supply <tt>concept_maps</tt> should
probably be users do not supply their own <tt>concept_map</tt>
specializations. The program will almost certainly supply
<tt>concept_maps</tt> - the standard itself supplies a specialization
for <tt>RvalueOf</tt> references. Note that the term <i>program</i> is
defined in 3.5 [basic.link]p1 and makes no account of the
standard library being treated differently to user written code.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-09 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The same problem is present in the words added for the
<tt>LvalueReference/RvalueReference</tt> concepts last meeting.
</p>
<p>
With three subsections requiring the same constraint, I'm wondering if there
is a better way to organise this section.
Possible 20.2.1 -&gt; 20.2.3 belong in the fundamental concepts clause in
 [concept.support]?  While they can be implemented purely as a
library feature without additional compiler support, they are pretty
fundamental and we want the same restriction on user-concept maps as is
mandated there.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the issue,
but believe the wording needs further improvement.
We want to investigate current definitions for nomenclature such as
"user" and "program."
Move to Open pending the recommended investigation.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change X [concept.transform] p2:
</p>

<blockquote>
-2- A <del>program</del> <ins>user</ins> shall not provide concept maps for
any concept in 20.1.1.
</blockquote>

<p>
Change  [concept.true] p2:
</p>

<blockquote>
-2- <i>Requires:</i> a <del>program</del> <ins>user</ins> shall not
provide a concept map for the <tt>True</tt> concept.
</blockquote>

<p>
Change  [concept.classify] p2:
</p>

<blockquote>
-2- <i>Requires:</i> a <del>program</del><ins>user</ins> shall not provide concept
maps for any concept in this section.
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1016"></a>1016. Response to JP 33</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [concept.comparison] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#concept.comparison">issues</a> in [concept.comparison].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 33</b></p>

<p>
<tt>LessThanComparable</tt> and <tt>EqualityComparable</tt> don't correspond to NaN. 
</p>

<p><b>Original proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Apply <tt>concept_map</tt> to these concepts at <tt>FloatingPointType</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I don't understand the proposed resolution - there is no such thing as a
'negative' concept_map, and these concepts are auto concepts that match
float/double etc. Also not clear how we are supposed to match values to
concepts.
</p>
<p>
Recommend NAD and treat as a subset of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#902">902</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Recommend NAD.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1017"></a>1017. Response to US 66</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [concept.regular] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 66</b></p>

<p>
Application of the <tt>Regular</tt> concept to floating-point types appears to be
controversial (see long discussion on std-lib reflector). 
</p>

<p><b>Original proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
State that the <tt>Regular</tt> concept does not apply to floating-point types. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Recommend that we handle the same as JP 33 / <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1016">1016</a>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Recommend Open, and review after resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#902">902</a> and revised axiom
feature.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1018"></a>1018. Response to US 70</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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">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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 70</b></p>

<p>
Specifications now expressed via narrative text are more accurately and
clearly expressed via executable code.
</p>
<p>
Wherever concepts are available that directly match this section's type
traits, express the traits in terms of the concepts instead of via
narrative text. Where the type traits do not quite match the
corresponding concepts, bring the two into alignment so as to avoid two
nearly-identical notions.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We think that this is a good idea, but it requires a lot of work. If someone
submits a paper proposing specific changes, we would be happy to review it
at the next meeting.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1020"></a>1020. Response to UK 204</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 204</b></p>

<p>
It is not possible to create a variant union based on a parameter pack
expansion, e.g. to implement a classic discriminated union template. 
</p>

<p><b>Original proposed resolutuion:</b></p>

<p>
Restore <tt>aligned_union</tt> template that was removed by LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#856">856</a>. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree. The need for <tt>aligned_union</tt> is compelling enough to reinstate.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2843.html">N2843</a>
proposes an extension to the <tt>[[align]]</tt> attribute
that further diminishes the need for this template.  Recommend NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark NAD as suggested.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1022"></a>1022. Response to UK 212</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 212</b></p>

<p>
The pointer-safety API is nothing to do with smart pointers, so does not
belong in 20.9.10 [util.smartptr]. In fact it is a set of language
support features are really belongs in clause 18 [language.support], with the contents declared in a header that
deals with language-support of memory management.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree in principle, but not with the proposed resolution. We believe it
belongs either a subsection of either 20 [utilities] or 20.9 [memory] as part of the general reorganization of 20 [utilities]. The declaration should stay in
<tt>&lt;memory&gt;</tt>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1023"></a>1023. Response to DE 22</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses DE 22</b></p>

<p>Related to issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1114">1114</a>.</p>

<p>
The conditions for deriving from <tt>std::unary_function</tt> and
<tt>std::binary_function</tt> are unclear: The condition would also be satisfied if
<tt>ArgTypes</tt> were <tt>std::vector&lt;T1&gt;</tt>, because it (arguably)
"contains" <tt>T1</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree. <tt>std::reference_wrapper</tt> has the same structure, and we
suggest that <tt>std::function</tt> be presented in the same way as
<tt>std::reference_wrapper</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-09 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Phrasing should be "publicly and
unambiguously derived from" and probably back in reference_wrapper too.  Updated
wording supplied.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the proposed wording.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
(no changes to <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis required)
</p>

<p>
Change synopsis in Class template function 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;Returnable R, CopyConstructible... ArgTypes&gt; 
class function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt; 
  : public unary_function&lt;T1, R&gt;      // <del><i>iff</i> sizeof...(ArgTypes) == 1 <i>and</i></del> <ins><i>see below</i></ins>
                                      <del>// ArgTypes <i>contains</i> T1</del>
  : public binary_function&lt;T1, T2, R&gt; // <del><i>iff</i> sizeof...(ArgTypes) == 2 <i>and</i></del> <ins><i>see below</i></ins>
                                      <del>// ArgTypes <i>contains</i> T1 <i>and</i> T2</del>
{
   ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add new p1/p2 before 20.8.14.2.1 [func.wrap.func.con]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p><ins>
The template instantiation <tt>function&lt;R(T1)&gt;</tt> shall be publicly and
unambiguously derived from 
<tt>std::unary_function&lt;T1,R&gt;</tt> if and only if the template type parameter
is a function type taking one argument of type <tt>T1</tt> and returning <tt>R</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p><ins>
The template instantiation <tt>function&lt;R(T1,T2)&gt;</tt> shall be publicly and
unambiguously derived from 
<tt>std::binary_function&lt;T1,T2,R&gt;</tt> if and only if the template type
parameter is a function type taking two arguments of type <tt>T1</tt> and <tt>T2</tt> and
returning <tt>R</tt>.
</ins></p>

<pre>explicit function();
</pre>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1024"></a>1024. Response to JP 39</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 39</b></p>

<p>
There are no requires corresponding to <tt>F</tt> of <tt>std::function</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-01 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1070">1070</a> removes the second constructor.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
Move to Tentatively Ready.
If issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1070">1070</a> is accepted,
the changes to the second constructor
in this issue are moot.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Constructors have no definition.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Correct as follows in 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func] (class definition)
</p>

<blockquote><pre> template&lt;class F, Allocator Alloc&gt;
   <ins>requires ConstructibleWithAllocator&lt;F, Alloc&gt;
     &amp;&amp; call=Callable&lt;F, ArgTypes...&gt;
     &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;call::result_type, R&gt;</ins>
   function(allocator_arg_t, const Alloc&amp;, F);
 template&lt;class F, Allocator Alloc&gt;
   <ins>requires ConstructibleWithAllocator&lt;F,Alloc&gt;
     &amp;&amp; call=Callable&lt;F, ArgTypes...&gt;
     &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;call::result_type, R&gt;</ins>
   function(allocator_arg_t, const Alloc&amp;, F&amp;&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1025"></a>1025. Response to UK 208</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 208</b></p>

<p>
<tt>std::hash</tt> should be implemented for much more of the standard
library. In particular for <tt>pair</tt>, <tt>tuple</tt> and all the
standard containers.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1026"></a>1026. Response to UK 209</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 209</b></p>

<p>
Smart pointers cannot be used in constrained templates.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We look forward to a paper on this topic. We recommend no action until a
paper is available. We understand that a paper is forthcoming.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Peter Dimov adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<tt>shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;</tt> and <tt>weak_ptr&lt;T&gt;</tt> support all
types <tt>T</tt> for which <tt>T*</tt> is valid. In other words, a
possible (partial) resolution is to change class <tt>T</tt> to
<tt>PointeeType T</tt> for <tt>shared_ptr</tt>, <tt>weak_ptr</tt> and
possibly <tt>enable_shared_from_this</tt>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1027"></a>1027. Response to UK 213</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.5 [default.allocator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 213</b></p>

<p>
<tt>std::allocator</tt> should be constrained to simplify its use on constrained
contexts. This library component models allocation from free store via the
new operator so choose constraints to 
match. The Allocator concept allows for a wider variety of allocators that
users may choose to supply if their allocation model does not require
operator new, without impacting the 
requirements of this template. 
</p>

<p>
Suggested direction:
</p>
<p>
The primary allocator template should be constrained to require
<tt>ObjectType&lt;T&gt;</tt> and <tt>FreeStoreAllocatable&lt;T&gt;</tt>.
Further operations to be constrained as required.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree as stated. A future paper will address additional related issues.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1028"></a>1028. Response to UK 214</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.9.6 [storage.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 214</b></p>

<p>
<tt>raw_storage_iterator</tt> needs constraining as an iterator adaptor to be safely
used in constrained templates 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We look forward to a paper on this topic. We recommend no action until a
paper is available.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair provided wording and rationale.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
20.9 [memory] p2
</p>
<p>
Update the synopsis for <tt>&lt;memory&gt;</tt>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>// 20.7.8, raw storage iterator:
template &lt;<del>class</del> <ins>ForwardIterator</ins> Out<del>put</del>Iter<del>ator</del>, <del>class</del> <ins>ObjectType</ins> T&gt; 
  <ins>requires OutputIterator&lt; OutIter, T &gt;</ins>
    class raw_storage_iterator;

<ins>template &lt;ForwardIterator OutIter, ObjectType T&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt; OutIter, T &gt;
  concept_map Iterator&lt;raw_storage_iterator&lt; OutIter, T &gt; &gt; { }</ins>
</pre></blockquote>


<p>
20.9.6 [storage.iterator] p1
</p>
<p>
Replace class template definition with:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>namespace std { 
  template &lt;<del>class</del> <ins>ForwardIterator</ins> Out<del>put</del>Iter<del>ator</del>, <del>class</del> <ins>ObjectType</ins> T&gt; 
    <ins>requires OutputIterator&lt; OutIter, T &gt;</ins>
  class raw_storage_iterator 
    : public iterator&lt;output_iterator_tag,void,void,void,void&gt; { 
  public: 
    explicit raw_storage_iterator(Out<del>put</del>Iter<del>ator</del> x); 

    raw_storage_iterator<del>&lt;OutputIterator,T&gt;</del>&amp; operator*(); 
    raw_storage_iterator<del>&lt;OutputIterator,T&gt;</del>&amp; operator=(const T&amp; element); 
    raw_storage_iterator<del>&lt;OutputIterator,T&gt;</del>&amp; operator++(); 
    raw_storage_iterator<del>&lt;OutputIterator,T&gt;</del> operator++(int); 
  }; 

  <ins>template &lt;ForwardIterator OutIter, ObjectType T&gt; 
    requires OutputIterator&lt; OutIter, T &gt;
    concept_map Iterator&lt;raw_storage_iterator&lt; OutIter, T &gt; &gt; { }</ins>
}
</pre></blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>raw_storage_iterator</tt> has to adapt a <tt>ForwardIterator</tt>,
rather than just an <tt>InputIterator</tt> for two reasons:
</p>

<ol type="i">
<li>
The initial iterator passed by value is expected to remain valid,
pointing to the initialized region of memory.
</li>
<li>
to avoid breaking the declaration of post-increment operator which would
require some kind of proxy formulation to support generalised InputIterators.
</li>
</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1029"></a>1029. Response to UK 210</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 210</b></p>

<p>Related to <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#582">582</a></p>

<p>
Specialized algorithms for memory managenment need requirements to be
easily usable in constrained templates.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We look forward to a paper on this topic. We recommend no action until a
paper is available.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Daniel adds:
</p>

<blockquote>
<ol>
<li>
I suggest <tt>Size</tt> should require <tt>IntegralLike</tt> and not <tt>UnsignedIntegralLike</tt>,
because otherwise simple int-literals could not be provided as arguments
and it would conflict with other algorithms that only require <tt>IntegralLike</tt>.
</li>
<li>
<p>
The current for-loop-test relies on evaluation in boolean context which is
not provided by <tt>ArithmeticLike</tt> and it's refinements. I propose to change the
corresponding for-loop-headers to:
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
for <tt>uninitialized_copy_n</tt>: <tt>for ( ; n &gt; Size(0); ++result, ++first, --n) {</tt>
</li>
<li>
for <tt>uninitialized_fill_n</tt>: <tt>for (; n &gt; Size(0); ++first, --n) {</tt>
</li>
</ol>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p>
Alisdair adds:
</p>
<blockquote>
For the record I agree with Daniel's suggestion.
</blockquote>

</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
20.9 [memory] p2
</p>
<p>
Update the synopsis for <tt>&lt;memory&gt;</tt>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> InputIterator <ins>InIter</ins>,
         <del>class ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutputIterator&lt;auto, InIter::reference&gt; OutIter</ins>&gt; 
   <ins>requires ForwardIterator&lt;OutIter&gt;</ins>
   <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins>
   uninitialized_copy(<del>InputIterator</del> <ins>InIter</ins> first, <del>InputIterator</del> <ins>InIter</ins> last, 
                      <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins> result);

template &lt;<del>class</del> InputIterator <ins>InIter</ins>,
          <del>class</del> <ins>IntegralLike</ins> Size,
          <del>class ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutputIterator&lt;auto, InIter::reference&gt; OutIter</ins>&gt; 
  <ins>requires ForwardIterator&lt;OutIter&gt;</ins>
  <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins>
  uninitialized_copy_n(<del>InputIterator</del> <ins>InIter</ins> first, Size n, 
                       <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins> result);

template &lt;<del>class</del> ForwardIterator <ins>Iter</ins>, <del>class</del> <ins>ObjectType</ins> T&gt;
  <ins>requires Constructible&lt; Iter::value_type, const T&amp; &gt;</ins>
  void uninitialized_fill(<del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>Iter</ins> first, <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>Iter</ins> last, 
                          const T&amp; x);

template &lt;<del>class</del> ForwardIterator <ins>Iter</ins>, <del>class</del> <ins>IntegralLike</ins> Size, <del>class</del> <ins>ObjectType</ins> T&gt; 
  <ins>requires Constructible&lt; Iter::value_type, const T&amp; &gt;</ins>
  void
  uninitialized_fill_n(<del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>Iter</ins> first, Size n, const T&amp; x);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Update as follows:
</p>

<p>
uninitialized_copy 20.9.8.2 [uninitialized.copy]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> InputIterator <ins>InIter</ins>,
         <del>class ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutputIterator&lt;auto, InIter::reference&gt; OutIter</ins>&gt; 
   <ins>requires ForwardIterator&lt;OutIter&gt;</ins>
   <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins>
   uninitialized_copy(<del>InputIterator</del> <ins>InIter</ins> first, <del>InputIterator</del> <ins>InIter</ins> last, 
                      <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins> result);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1- <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>for (; first != last; ++result, ++first)  {
   new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(&amp;*result))
       <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;</del> <ins>OutIter</ins>::value_type(*first);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
-2- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>result</tt>
</p>

</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> InputIterator <ins>InIter</ins>,
          <del>class</del> <ins>IntegralLike</ins> Size,
          <del>class ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutputIterator&lt;auto, InIter::reference&gt; OutIter</ins>&gt; 
  <ins>requires ForwardIterator&lt;OutIter&gt;</ins>
  <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins>
  uninitialized_copy_n(<del>InputIterator</del> <ins>InIter</ins> first, Size n, 
                       <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>OutIter</ins> result);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
-3- Effects:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>for ( ; n &gt; <ins>Size(</ins>0<ins>)</ins>; ++result, ++first, --n) {
   new (static_cast&lt;void*&gt;(&amp;*result))
       <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;</del> <ins>OutIter</ins>::value_type(*first);
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
-4- <i>Returns:</i> result
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>


<p>
uninitialized_fill 20.9.8.3 [uninitialized.fill]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> ForwardIterator <ins>Iter</ins>, <del>class</del> <ins>ObjectType</ins> T&gt;
  <ins>requires Constructible&lt; Iter::value_type, const T&amp; &gt;</ins>
  void uninitialized_fill(<del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>Iter</ins> first, <del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>Iter</ins> last, 
                          const T&amp; x);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1- <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>for (; first != last; ++first) {
   new ( static_cast&lt;void*&gt;( &amp;*first) ) 
       <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;</del> <ins>Iter</ins>::value_type(x);
}
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


<p>
uninitialized_fill_n 20.9.8.4 [uninitialized.fill.n]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> ForwardIterator <ins>Iter</ins>, <del>class</del> <ins>IntegralLike</ins> Size, <del>class</del> <ins>ObjectType</ins> T&gt; 
  <ins>requires Constructible&lt; Iter::value_type, const T&amp; &gt;</ins>
  void
  uninitialized_fill_n(<del>ForwardIterator</del> <ins>Iter</ins> first, Size n, const T&amp; x);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1- <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>for (; n<del>--</del> <ins>&gt; Size(0)</ins>; ++first<ins>, --n</ins>) {
   new ( static_cast&lt;void*&gt;( &amp;*first) ) 
       <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;ForwardIterator&gt;</del> <ins>Iter</ins>::value_type(x);
}
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1031"></a>1031. Response to US 78</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 78</b></p>

<p>
There is presently no way to convert directly from a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> to a
<tt>unique_ptr</tt>. Add an interface that performs the conversion. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We look forward to a paper on this topic. We recommend no action until a
paper is available. We believe that the shared pointer must use the default
deleter for the conversion to succeed.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Peter Dimov adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This is basically a request for <tt>shared_ptr&lt;&gt;::release</tt> in
disguise, with all the associated problems. Not a good idea.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The rationale for the omission of a release() member function from shared_ptr is given in:
<a href="http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_39_0/libs/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.htm">http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_39_0/libs/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.htm</a>
</p>
<p>
The implementation of such a member is non-trivial (and maybe
impossible), because it would need to account for the deleter.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-26 Howard sets to Tentatively NAD Future.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I took an online poll and got 3 votes for NAD and 3 for NAD Future.  Personally
I prefer NAD Future as this does refer to an extension that could conceivably be
considered beyond C++0X.
</p>

<p>
However such an extension would need to solve a couple of problems:
</p>

<ol>
<li>What is the interface for such a conversion when the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> does
not have unique ownership?  Throw an exception?  Create a null <tt>unique_ptr</tt>?
Undefined behavior?
</li>

<li>
<p>
How does one handle custom deleters given to the <tt>shared_ptr</tt> constructor?
</p>
<p>
I do not believe it is possible to implement a general answer to this question.
The <tt>shared_ptr</tt> deleter is a run time (or construction time) characteristic.
The <tt>unique_ptr</tt> deleter is a compile time characteristic.  In general one
can not know to what type of <tt>unqiue_ptr</tt> you are converting to.
</p>
<p>
One answer is for the user of the conversion to specify the deleter type and perhaps
throw an exception if the specification turns out to be incorrect.
</p>
<p>
Another answer is for the conversion to only be valid when the underlying deleter
is <tt>default_delete</tt>.  We would probalby need to specify that this is indeed the
underlying deleter of a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> when a custom deleter is not given in
the constructor.
</p>
</li>
</ol>

<p>
At any rate, there are non-trivial design issues which would need to be implemented
and tested in the field for usability prior to standardization.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Future.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1032"></a>1032. Response to JP 45</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses JP 45</b></p>

<p>
<tt>Rep</tt>, <tt>Period</tt>, <tt>Clock</tt> and <tt>Duration</tt>
don't correspond to concept.
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Rep, class Period = ratio&lt;1&gt;&gt; class duration; 
template &lt;class Clock, class Duration = typename Clock::duration&gt; class time_point; 
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Make concept for <tt>Rep</tt>, <tt>Period</tt>, <tt>Clock</tt> and <tt>Duration</tt>.
Fix 20.11 [time] and <tt>wait_until</tt>
and <tt>wait_for</tt>'s template parameter at 30 [thread]. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We agree that this section needs concepts. We look forward to a paper on
this topic. We recommend no action until a paper is available.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1035"></a>1035. Response to UK 226</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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 226</b></p>

<p>
<tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt> must be added to this list. In particular it
doesn't satisfy: - no <tt>swap()</tt> function invalidates any
references, pointers, or iterators referring to the elements of the
containers being swapped. and probably doesn't satisfy: - no
<tt>swap()</tt> function throws an exception.
</p>
<p>
If <tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt> remains a container, this will have to also
reference <tt>array</tt>, which will then have to say which of these
points it satisfies.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree. The proposed resolution is incomplete. Further work required.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-01 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1099">1099</a> also suggests
adding move constructor to this.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Howard is to draft a note that explains what happens to references.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD.  No consensus for change.
</blockquote>



<p><i>[
2009-08-01 Howard provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a paragraph to 23.3.1.2 [array.special]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;Swappable T, size_t N&gt; void swap(array&lt;T,N&gt;&amp; x, array&lt;T,N&gt;&amp; y);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>swap_ranges(x.begin(), x.end(), y.begin());
</pre></blockquote>

<p><ins>
[<i>Note:</i>
Outstanding iterators, references and pointers may be invalidated.
� <i>end note</i>]
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1036"></a>1036. Response to UK 231</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 231</b></p>

<p>
p9-p11 are redundant now that Concepts define what it means to be an
Iterator and guide overload resolution accordingly. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree with issue and change to 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]. The
changes required to 21 [strings] will be part of the general
concept support for that clause.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Strike 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]p9-11. Make sure <tt>std::basic_string</tt>
has constraints similar to
<tt>std::vector</tt> to meet this old guarantee. 
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1041"></a>1041. Response to UK 239</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 239</b></p>

<p>
It is not possible to take a move-only key out of an unordered
container, such as (<tt>multi</tt>)<tt>set</tt> or
(<tt>multi</tt>)<tt>map</tt>, or the new unordered containers.
</p>

<p>
Add below <tt>a.erase(q)</tt>, <tt>a.extract(q)</tt>, with the following notation:
</p>
<p>
<tt>a.extract(q)&gt;</tt>, Return type <tt>pair&lt;key, iterator&gt;</tt>
Extracts the element pointed to by <tt>q</tt> and erases it from the
<tt>set</tt>. Returns a <tt>pair</tt> containing the value pointed to by
<tt>q</tt> and an <tt>iterator</tt> pointing to the element immediately
following <tt>q</tt> prior to the element being erased. If no such
element exists,returns <tt>a.end()</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We look forward to a paper on this topic. We recommend no action until a
paper is available. The paper would need to address exception safety.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Would <tt>value_type</tt> be a better return type than <tt>key_type</tt>?
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave Open. Alisdair to contact Chris Jefferson about this.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-09-20 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
See the 2009-09-19 comment of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#839">839</a> for an API which
accomplishes this functionality and also addresses several other use
cases which this proposal does not.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD Future. No consensus to make the change at this time.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts] Table 85, add:
</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.erase(q)</tt></td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
</tr><tr>
<td><ins><tt>a.extract(q)</tt></ins></td>
<td><ins><tt>pair&lt;key_type, iterator&gt;</tt></ins></td>
<td><ins>Extracts the element pointed to by <tt>q</tt> and erases it from the <tt>set</tt>. 
Returns a <tt>pair</tt> containing the value pointed to by <tt>q</tt> and an <tt>iterator</tt>
pointing to the element immediately following <tt>q</tt> prior to the element being
erased. If no such element 
exists, returns <tt>a.end()</tt>.</ins></td>
<td><ins>amortized constant</ins></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
In 23.2.5 [unord.req] Table 87, add:
</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>a.erase(q)</tt></td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
<td>...</td>
</tr><tr>
<td><ins><tt>a.extract(q)</tt></ins></td>
<td><ins><tt>pair&lt;key_type, iterator&gt;</tt></ins></td>
<td><ins>Extracts the element pointed to by <tt>q</tt> and erases it from the <tt>set</tt>. 
Returns a <tt>pair</tt> containing the value pointed to by <tt>q</tt> and an <tt>iterator</tt>
pointing to the element immediately following <tt>q</tt> prior to the element being
erased. If no such element 
exists, returns <tt>a.end()</tt>.</ins></td>
<td><ins>amortized constant</ins></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1042"></a>1042. Response to UK 244</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 244</b></p>

<p>
The validity of the expression <tt>&amp;a[n] == &amp;a[0] + n</tt> is contingent on
<tt>operator&amp;</tt> doing the "right thing" (as captured by the <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>
requirements in table 30 in C++2003). However this constraint has been
lost in the Concepts of C++0x. This applies to <tt>vector</tt> and <tt>array</tt> (it
actually applies to <tt>string</tt> also, but that's a different chapter, so I'll
file a separate comment there and cross-reference).
</p>

<p>
Suggested solution:
</p>

<p>
Define a <tt>ContiguousStrorage</tt> and apply it to
<tt>vector</tt>, <tt>array</tt> and <tt>string</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Agree with the issue but not the details of the proposed solution. Walter to
provide wording for the new concept.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Another LWG subgroup wondered if this concept
should extend to <tt>complex&lt;T&gt;</tt>, and so not be built on the container concept at
all?
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave Open, pending a post-Concepts Working Draft.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark issue 1042 as NAD, in rationale state that this was solved by removal of concepts.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to <tt>&lt;container_concepts&gt;</tt> synopsis in  [container.concepts]
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>concept&lt; typename C &gt; ContiguousStorageContainer <i>see below</i>;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add a new section to the end of  [container.concepts]
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
23.1.6.x ContiguousStorageContainer concept [container.concepts.contiguous]
</p>

<pre>concept ContiguousStorageContainer&lt; typename C &gt;
  : Container&lt;C&gt;
{
  value_type* data(C&amp;);

  axiom Contiguity(C&amp; c, size_type i) {
    if( i &lt; size(c) ) {
         addressof( * (data(c) + i) )
      == addressof( * advance(data(c), i) );
    }
  }
}
</pre>

<p>
The <tt>ContiguousStorageContainer</tt> concept describes a container whose elements
are allocated in a single region of memory, and are stored sequentially
without intervening padding other than to meet alignment requirements.
For example, the elements may be stored in a
single array of suitable length.
</p>

<pre>value_type * data( C&amp; );
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> a pointer to the first element in the region of storage.
Result is unspecified for an empty container.
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.3.1 [array] p1:
</p>

<blockquote>
-1- The header <tt>&lt;array&gt;</tt> defines a class template for
storing fixed-size sequences of objects. An <tt>array</tt> supports
random access iterators. An instance of <tt>array&lt;T, N&gt;</tt>
stores <tt>N</tt> elements of type <tt>T</tt>, so that <tt>size() ==
N</tt> is an invariant. The elements of an <tt>array</tt> are stored
contiguously, meaning that <del>if <tt>a</tt> is</del> an
<tt>array&lt;T, N&gt;</tt> <del>then it obeys the identity <tt>&amp;a[n]
== &amp;a[0] + n</tt> for all <tt>0 &lt;= n &lt; N</tt></del>
<ins>satisfies the concept <tt>ContiguousStorageContainer&lt; array&lt;T,
N&gt;&gt;</tt></ins>.
</blockquote>

<p>
Add to the synopsis in 23.3.1 [array]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>    ...
    T * data(); 
    const T * data() const; 
  };

  <ins>template&lt; typename T, size_t N &gt;</ins>
    <ins>concept_map ContiguousStorageContainer&lt; array&lt;T, N&gt;&gt; {};</ins>
} 
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 23.4.1 [vector] p1:
</p>

<blockquote>
A <tt>vector</tt> is a sequence container that supports random access
iterators. In addition, it supports (amortized) constant time insert and
erase operations at the end; insert and erase in the middle take linear
time. Storage management is handled automatically, though hints can be
given to improve efficiency. The elements of a vector are stored
contiguously, meaning that <del>if <tt>v</tt> is</del> a
<tt>vector&lt;T, Alloc&gt;</tt> <ins>(</ins>where <tt>T</tt> is some
type other than <tt>bool</tt><ins>)</ins><del>, then it obeys the
identity <tt>&amp;v[n] == &amp;v[0] + n</tt> for all <tt>0 &lt;= n &lt;
v.size()</tt></del> <ins>satisfies the concept <tt>ContiguousStorageContainer&lt;
vector&lt; T, Alloc&gt;&gt;</tt></ins>.
</blockquote>

<p>
Add at the end of the synopsis in 23.4.1 [vector] p2:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>template&lt; typename T, typename A &gt;
  requires !SameType&lt; T, bool &gt;
  concept_map ContiguousStorageContainer&lt; vector&lt;T, A&gt;&gt; {};</ins>
</pre></blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
Solved by removal of concepts.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1043"></a>1043. Response to US 91</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 91</b></p>

<p>
It is unclear whether or not a failed <tt>compare_exchange</tt> is a RMW operation
(as used in 1.10 [intro.multithread]).
</p>

<p>
Suggested solution:
</p>

<p>
Make failing <tt>compare_exchange</tt> operations <b>not</b> be RMW.
</p>

<p><i>[
Anthony Williams adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
In 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p18 it says that "These
operations are atomic read-modify-write operations" (final sentence).
This is overly restrictive on the implementations of
<tt>compare_exchange_weak</tt> and <tt>compare_exchange_strong</tt> on platforms without a
native CAS instruction.
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Group agrees with the resolution as proposed by Anthony Williams in the attached note.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We recommend the proposed resolution be reviewed
by members of the Concurrency Subgroup.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This is likely to be addressed by Lawrence's upcoming paper. He will
adopt the proposed resolution.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-17 Handled by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2925.html">N2925</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p18:
</p>

<blockquote>
-18- <i>Effects:</i> Atomically, compares the value pointed to by
<tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt> for equality with that in
<tt>expected</tt>, and if true, replaces the value pointed to by
<tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt> with desired, and if false, updates
the value in <tt>expected</tt> with the value pointed to by
<tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt>. Further, if the comparison is true,
memory is affected according to the value of <tt>success</tt>, and if the
comparison is false, memory is affected according to the value of
<tt>failure</tt>. When only one <tt>memory_order</tt> argument is
supplied, the value of <tt>success</tt> is <tt>order</tt>, and the value
of <tt>failure</tt> is <tt>order</tt> except that a value of
<tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt> shall be replaced by the value
<tt>memory_order_acquire</tt> and a value of
<tt>memory_order_release</tt> shall be replaced by the value
<tt>memory_order_relaxed</tt>. <ins>If the comparison is <tt>true</tt>, </ins>
<del>T</del><ins>t</ins>hese operations are atomic
read-modify-write operations (1.10). 
<ins>If the comparison is <tt>false</tt>, these
operations are atomic load operations.</ins>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1046"></a>1046. Response to UK 329</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 329</b></p>

<p>
<tt>future</tt>, <tt>promise</tt> and <tt>packaged_task</tt> provide a
framework for creating future values, but a simple function to tie all
three components together is missing. Note that we only need a *simple*
facility for C++0x. Advanced thread pools are to be left for TR2.
</p>

<p>
Simple Proposal:
</p>

<p>
Provide a simple function along the lines of: 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt; typename F, typename ... Args &gt;
  requires Callable&lt; F, Args... &gt;
    future&lt; Callable::result_type &gt; async( F&amp;&amp; f, Args &amp;&amp; ... ); 
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Semantics are similar to creating a <tt>thread</tt> object with a <tt>packaged_task</tt>
invoking <tt>f</tt> with <tt>forward&lt;Args&gt;(args...)</tt>
but details are left unspecified to allow different scheduling and thread
spawning implementations. 
</p>
<p>
It is unspecified whether a task submitted to async is run on its own thread
or a thread previously used for another async task. If a call to <tt>async</tt>
succeeds, it shall be safe to wait for it from any thread. 
</p>
<p>
The state of <tt>thread_local</tt> variables shall be preserved during <tt>async</tt> calls. 
</p>
<p>
No two incomplete async tasks shall see the same value of
<tt>this_thread::get_id()</tt>. 
</p>
<p>
[<i>Note:</i> this effectively forces new tasks to be run on a new thread, or a
fixed-size pool with no queue. If the 
library is unable to spawn a new thread or there are no free worker threads
then the <tt>async</tt> call should fail. <i>--end note</i>] 
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The concurrency subgroup has revisited this issue and decided that it
could be considered a defect according to the Kona compromise. A task
group was formed lead by Lawrence Crowl and Bjarne Stroustrup to write a
paper for Frankfort proposing a simple asynchronous launch facility
returning a <tt>future</tt>. It was agreed that the callable must be run on a
separate thread from the caller, but not necessarily a brand-new thread.
The proposal might or might not allow for an implementation that uses
fixed-size or unlimited thread pools.
</p>
<p>
Bjarne in c++std-lib-23121: I think that what we agreed was that to
avoid deadlock <tt>async()</tt> would almost certainly be specified to  launch in
a different thread from the thread that executed <tt>async()</tt>, but I don't
think it was a specific design constraint.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Proposed resolution: see
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2996.html">N2996</a>
(Herb's and Lawrence's paper on Async). Move state to NAD editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1047"></a>1047. Response to UK 334</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.unique_future">issues</a> in [futures.unique_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 334</b></p>

<p>
Behaviour of <tt>get()</tt> is undefined if calling <tt>get()</tt> while
not <tt>is_ready()</tt>. The intent is that <tt>get()</tt> is a blocking
call, and will wait for the future to become ready.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Agree, move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-04-03 Thomas J. Gritzan adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
This issue also applies to <tt>shared_future::get()</tt>.
</p>

<p>
Suggested wording:
</p>

<p>
Add a paragraph to 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void shared_future&lt;void&gt;::get() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>is_ready()</tt> would return <tt>false</tt>, block on the asynchronous 
result associated with <tt>*this</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
It is not clear to us that this is an issue,
because the proposed resolution's Effects clause seems to duplicate
information already present in the Synchronization clause.
Keep in Review status.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a paragraph to 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>R&amp;&amp; unique_future::get(); 
R&amp; unique_future&lt;R&amp;&gt;::get(); 
void unique_future&lt;void&gt;::get();
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p><i>Note:</i>...</p>
<p>
<ins><i>Effects:</i> If <tt>is_ready()</tt> would return <tt>false</tt>,
block on the asynchronous result associated with <tt>*this</tt>.</ins>
</p>
<p>
<i>Synchronization:</i> if <tt>*this</tt> is associated with a
<tt>promise</tt> object, the completion of <tt>set_value()</tt> or
<tt>set_exception()</tt> to that <tt>promise</tt> happens before (1.10)
<tt>get()</tt> returns.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1048"></a>1048. Response to UK 335</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.unique_future">issues</a> in [futures.unique_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 335</b></p>

<p>
<tt>std::unique_future</tt> is <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>, so you can transfer the
association with an asynchronous result from one instance to another.
However, there is no way to determine whether or not an instance has
been moved from, and therefore whether or not it is safe to wait for it.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::promise&lt;int&gt; p;
std::unique_future&lt;int&gt; uf(p.get_future());
std::unique_future&lt;int&gt; uf2(std::move(uf));
uf.wait(); <font color="#C80000">// oops, uf has no result to wait for. </font>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Suggest we add a <tt>waitable()</tt> function to <tt>unique_future</tt>
(and <tt>shared_future</tt>) akin to <tt>std::thread::joinable()</tt>,
which returns <tt>true</tt> if there is an associated result to wait for
(whether or not it is ready).
</p>

<p>
Then we can say:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>if(uf.waitable()) uf.wait();
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Create an issue. Requires input from Howard. Probably NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit, Howard thows in his two cents:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Here is a copy/paste of my last prototype of <tt>unique_future</tt> which was
several years ago.  At that time I was calling <tt>unique_future</tt> <tt>future</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class R&gt;
class future
{
public:
    typedef R result_type;
private:
    future(const future&amp;);// = delete;
    future&amp; operator=(const future&amp;);// = delete;

    template &lt;class R1, class F1&gt; friend class prommise;
public:
    future();
    ~future();

    future(future&amp;&amp; f);
    future&amp; operator=(future&amp;&amp; f);

    void swap(future&amp;&amp; f);

    <b>bool joinable() const;</b>
    bool is_normal() const;
    bool is_exceptional() const;
    bool is_ready() const;

    R get();

    void join();
    template &lt;class ElapsedTime&gt;
        bool timed_join(const ElapsedTime&amp;);
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
<tt>shared_future</tt> had a similar interface.  I intentionally reused
the <tt>thread</tt> interface where possible to lessen the learning
curve std::lib clients will be faced with.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1049"></a>1049. Response to UK 339</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 339</b></p>

<p>
Move assignment is goiing in the wrong direction, assigning from
<tt>*this</tt> to the passed rvalue, and then returning a reference to
an unusable <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Agree, move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We recommend deferring this issue until after Detlef's paper (on futures)
has been issued.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Strike 30.6.5 [futures.promise] p6 and change p7:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>promise&amp; operator=(promise&amp;&amp; rhs);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<del>-6- <i>Effects:</i> move assigns its associated state to <tt>rhs</tt>.</del>
</p>
<p>
-7- <i>Postcondition:</i> <del><tt>*this</tt> has no associated
state.</del> <ins>associated state of <tt>*this</tt> is the same as the
associated state of <tt>rhs</tt> before the call. <tt>rhs</tt> has no
associated state.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1050"></a>1050. Response to UK 340</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 340</b></p>

<p>
There is an implied postcondition for <tt>get_future()</tt> that the state of the
<tt>promise</tt> is transferred into the <tt>future</tt> leaving the <tt>promise</tt> with no
associated state. It should be spelled out.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Agree, move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-04-03 Thomas J. Gritzan adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
<tt>promise::get_future()</tt> must not invalidate the state of the promise object. 
</p>
<p>
A promise is used like this: 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>promise&lt;int&gt; p; 
unique_future&lt;int&gt; f = p.get_future(); 
<font color="#C80000">// post 'p' to a thread that calculates a value </font>
<font color="#C80000">// use 'f' to retrieve the value. </font>
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
So <tt>get_future()</tt> must return an object that shares the same associated 
state with <tt>*this</tt>. 
</p>
<p>
But still, this function should throw an <tt>future_already_retrieved</tt> error 
when it is called twice. 
</p>
<p>
<tt>packaged_task::get_future()</tt> throws <tt>std::bad_function_call</tt> if its <tt>future</tt>
was already retrieved. It should throw 
<tt>future_error(future_already_retrieved)</tt>, too. 
</p>
<p>
Suggested resolution: 
</p>
<p>
Replace p12/p13 30.6.5 [futures.promise]: 
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
-12- <i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> if <del><tt>*this</tt> has no associated state</del>
<ins>the <tt>future</tt> has already been retrieved</ins>.
</p>
<p>
-13- <i>Error conditions:</i> <tt>future_already_retrieved</tt> if <del><tt>*this</tt>
has no associated state</del>
<ins>the <tt>future</tt> associated with 
the associated state has already been retrieved</ins>.
</p>
<p>
<ins><i>Postcondition:</i> The returned object and <tt>*this</tt> share the associated state.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
Replace p14 30.6.10 [futures.task]: 
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
-14- <i>Throws:</i> <tt><del>std::bad_function_call</del> <ins>future_error</ins></tt> if the future <del>associated with
the task</del> has already been retrieved.
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Error conditions:</i> <tt>future_already_retrieved</tt> if the <tt>future</tt> associated with 
the task has already been retrieved. 
</ins></p>
<p>
<ins><i>Postcondition:</i> The returned object and <tt>*this</tt> share the associated task.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Keep in Review status
pending Detlef's forthcoming paper on futures.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add after p13 30.6.5 [futures.promise]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>unique_future&lt;R&gt; get_future();
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-13- ...
</p>
<p>
<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>*this</tt> has no associated state.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1051"></a>1051. Response to UK 279</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.3.12 [reverse.iter.opindex], 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#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 279</b></p>

<p>
The reason the return type became unspecified is LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#386">386</a>. This
reasoning no longer applies as there are at least two ways to get the right
return type with the new language facilities added since the previous
standard. 
</p>

<p>
Proposal: Specify the return type using either decltype or the Iter concept_map.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Under discussion. This is a general question about all iterator
adapters.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Howard adds post Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I am requesting test cases to demonstrate a position.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-24 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I recommend NAD. Without concepts we can no longer
restrict this member in a trivial way. Using <tt>decltype</tt> the
declaration would be along the lines of
</p>
<blockquote><pre>static const Iter&amp; __base(); // not defined
auto operator[](difference_type n) const -&gt; decltype(__base()[-n-1]);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
but once <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> is instantiated for some given type
<tt>Iter</tt> which cannot form a well-formed expression <tt>__base()[-n-1]</tt>
this would cause an ill-formed function declaration, diagnostic
required, and no silent SFINAE elimination.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-22 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
IMO, my original comment regarding ill-formedness of the described
construction is still correct, but I must add that I should weaken my
assertion "Without concepts we can no longer restrict this member in
a trivial way".
</p>

<p>
In fact with the existence of default template arguments for function
templates it is not too hard to implement this like as follows, which
shows that we can indeed simulate to some sense constrained
member functions in C++0x.
</p>

<p>
My example does not really proof that the specification is easy, but
it should be possible. I assume that the implementation would not
be ABI compatible, though.
</p>

<p>
It is now your own decision how to proceed ;-)
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;type_traits&gt;
#include &lt;cstddef&gt;

template&lt;class T&gt;
typename std::add_rvalue_reference&lt;T&gt;::type declval();

template&lt;class It&gt;
struct reverse_iterator {
    It base;
    
    typedef std::ptrdiff_t difference_type;
    
    template&lt;class U = It, class Res =
     decltype(declval&lt;const U&amp;&gt;()[declval&lt;difference_type&gt;()])
    &gt;
    Res operator[](difference_type n) const  {
        return base[-n-1];
    }    
};

struct MyIter {
};

int main() {
    reverse_iterator&lt;int*&gt; ri;
    ri[0] = 2;
    reverse_iterator&lt;MyIter&gt; ri2;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The above declaration could be simplified, but the ideal solution
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class U = It&gt;
  decltype(declval&lt;const U&amp;&gt;()[declval&lt;difference_type&gt;()])
     operator[](difference_type n) const;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
does not work yet on gcc 4.4.1.
</p>

</blockquote>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1052"></a>1052. Response to UK 281</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.1.3.5 [reverse.iter.opref] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 281</b></p>

<p>
The current specification for return value for <tt>reverse_iterator::operator-&gt;</tt>
will always be a true pointer type, but <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> supports proxy
iterators where the pointer type may be some kind of 'smart pointer'.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
<tt>move_iterator</tt> avoids this problem by returning a value of the wrapped
Iterator type.
study group formed to come up with a suggested resolution.
</p>
<p>
<tt>move_iterator</tt> solution shown in proposed wording.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 post-Frankfurt:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Howard to deconceptize. Move to Review after that happens.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-08-01 Howard deconceptized:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We can't think of any reason we can't just define reverse
iterator's pointer types to be the same as the underlying iterator's
pointer type, and get it by calling the right arrow directly.
</p>
<p>
Here is the proposed wording that was replaced:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Iterator&gt; 
class reverse_iterator { 
  ...
  typedef <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;</del>Iterator<del>&gt;::pointer</del> pointer;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 24.5.1.3.5 [reverse.iter.opref]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>pointer operator-&gt;() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i>
<blockquote><pre><del>&amp;(operator*());</del>
<ins>this-&gt;tmp = current;</ins>
<ins>--this-&gt;tmp;</ins>
<ins>return this-&gt;tmp;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-03-03 Daniel opens:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<ol>

<li>
There is a minor problem with the exposition-only declaration of the private
member <tt>deref_tmp</tt> which is modified in a const member function (and the
same problem occurs in the specification of <tt>operator*</tt>). The fix is to
make it a mutable member.
</li>

<li>
<p>
The more severe problem is that the resolution for some reasons
does not explain in the rationale why it was decided to differ from
the suggested fix (using <tt>deref_tmp</tt> instead of <tt>tmp</tt>) in the
[ 2009-10 Santa Cruz] comment:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>this-&gt;deref_tmp = current;
--this-&gt;deref_tmp;
return this-&gt;deref_tmp;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
combined with the change of
</p>

<blockquote><pre>typedef typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::pointer pointer;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
to
</p>

<blockquote><pre>typedef Iterator pointer;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The problem of the agreed on wording is that the following rather
typical example, that compiled with the wording before 1052 had
been applied, won't compile anymore:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;iterator&gt;
#include &lt;utility&gt;

int main() {
  typedef std::pair&lt;int, double&gt; P;
  P op;
  std::reverse_iterator&lt;P*&gt; ri(&amp;op + 1);
  ri-&gt;first; // Error
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Comeau online returns (if a correspondingly changed
<tt>reverse_iterator</tt> is used):
</p>

<blockquote><pre>"error: expression must have class type
     return deref_tmp.operator-&gt;();
            ^
         detected during instantiation of "Iterator
                   reverse_iterator&lt;Iterator&gt;::operator-&gt;() const [with
                   Iterator=std::pair&lt;int, double&gt; *]""
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Thus the change will break valid, existing code based
on <tt>std::reverse_iterator</tt>.
</p>

</li>

</ol>

<p>
IMO the suggestion proposed in the comment is a necessary fix, which harmonizes
with the similar specification of <tt>std::move_iterator</tt> and properly
reflects the recursive nature of the evaluation of <tt>operator-&gt;</tt>
overloads.
</p>

<p>
Suggested resolution:
</p>

<ol>

<li>
<p>
In the class template <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> synopsis of 24.5.1.1 [reverse.iterator] change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
template &lt;class Iterator&gt;
class reverse_iterator : public
             iterator&lt;typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::iterator_category,
             typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::value_type,
             typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::difference_type,
             <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;</del>Iterator<del>&gt;::pointer</del>,
             typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::reference&gt; {
public:
  [..]
  typedef <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;</del>Iterator<del>&gt;::pointer</del> pointer;
  [..]
protected:
  Iterator current;
private:
  <ins>mutable</ins> Iterator deref_tmp; // exposition only
};
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
Change 24.5.1.3.5 [reverse.iter.opref]/1 as indicated:

<blockquote><pre>pointer operator-&gt;() const;
</pre>

<blockquote>
1 <i><del>Returns</del> <ins>Effects</ins>:</i> <del><tt>&amp;(operator*())</tt>.</del>
<blockquote><pre><ins>deref_tmp = current;</ins>
<ins>--deref_tmp;</ins>
<ins>return deref_tmp;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</li>

</ol>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
We prefer to make to use a local variable instead of <tt>deref_tmp</tt> within
<tt>operator-&gt;()</tt>.  And although this means that the <tt>mutable</tt>
change is no longer needed, we prefer to keep it because it is needed for
<tt>operator*()</tt> anyway.
</p>

<p>
Here is the proposed wording that was replaced:
</p>

<blockquote class="note">
<p>
Change 24.5.1.3.5 [reverse.iter.opref]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>pointer operator-&gt;() const;
</pre>

<blockquote>

<i>Returns:</i>
<blockquote><pre><del>&amp;(operator*());</del>
<ins>deref_tmp = current;
--deref_tmp;
return deref_tmp::operator-&gt;();</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>


</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-03-10 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Here are three tests that the current proposed wording passes, and no
other solution I've seen passes all three:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
Proxy pointer support:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;iterator&gt;
#include &lt;cassert&gt;

struct X { int m; };

X x;

struct IterX {
    typedef std::bidirectional_iterator_tag iterator_category;
    typedef X&amp; reference;
    struct pointer
    {
        pointer(X&amp; v) : value(v) {}
        X&amp; value;
        X* operator-&gt;() const {return &amp;value;}
    };
    typedef std::ptrdiff_t difference_type;
    typedef X value_type;
    // additional iterator requirements not important for this issue
    
    reference operator*() const { return x; }
    pointer operator-&gt;() const { return pointer(x); }
    IterX&amp; operator--() {return *this;}

};

int main()
{
    std::reverse_iterator&lt;IterX&gt; ix;
    assert(&amp;ix-&gt;m == &amp;(*ix).m);
}
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Raw pointer support:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;iterator&gt;
#include &lt;utility&gt;

int main() {
  typedef std::pair&lt;int, double&gt; P;
  P op;
  std::reverse_iterator&lt;P*&gt; ri(&amp;op + 1);
  ri-&gt;first; // Error
}
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Caching iterator support:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;iterator&gt;
#include &lt;cassert&gt;

struct X { int m; };

struct IterX {
    typedef std::bidirectional_iterator_tag iterator_category;
    typedef X&amp; reference;
    typedef X* pointer;
    typedef std::ptrdiff_t difference_type;
    typedef X value_type;
    // additional iterator requirements not important for this issue
    
    reference operator*() const { return value; }
    pointer operator-&gt;() const { return &amp;value; }
    IterX&amp; operator--() {return *this;}

private:
    mutable X value;
};

int main()
{
    std::reverse_iterator&lt;IterX&gt; ix;
    assert(&amp;ix-&gt;m == &amp;(*ix).m);
}
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Future, rationale added.
</blockquote>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The LWG did not reach a consensus for a change to the WP.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<ol>

<li>
<p>
In the class template <tt>reverse_iterator</tt> synopsis of 24.5.1.1 [reverse.iterator] change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
template &lt;class Iterator&gt;
class reverse_iterator : public
             iterator&lt;typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::iterator_category,
             typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::value_type,
             typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::difference_type,
             <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;</del>Iterator<ins>&amp;</ins><del>&gt;::pointer</del>,
             typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::reference&gt; {
public:
  [..]
  typedef <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;</del>Iterator<ins>&amp;</ins><del>&gt;::pointer</del> pointer;
  [..]
protected:
  Iterator current;
private:
  <ins>mutable</ins> Iterator deref_tmp; // exposition only
};
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
Change 24.5.1.3.5 [reverse.iter.opref]/1 as indicated:

<blockquote><pre>pointer operator-&gt;() const;
</pre>

<blockquote>
1 <i><del>Returns</del> <ins>Effects</ins>:</i> <del><tt>&amp;(operator*())</tt>.</del>
<blockquote><pre><ins>deref_tmp = current;</ins>
<ins>--deref_tmp;</ins>
<ins>return deref_tmp;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</li>

</ol>










<hr>
<h3><a name="1053"></a>1053. Response to UK 295</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 295</b></p>

<p>
There is a level of redundancy in the library specification for many
algorithms that can be eliminated with the combination of concepts and
default parameters for function templates. Eliminating redundancy simplified
specification and reduces the risk of introducing accidental
inconsistencies.
</p>
<p>
Proposed resolution: Adopt
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2743.pdf">N2743</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
NAD, this change would break code that takes the address of an
algorithm.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Request 'Open'.  The issues in the paper go beyond just reducing
the number of signatures, but cover unifying the idea of the ordering
operation used by algorithms, containers and other library components.  At
least, it takes a first pass at the problem.
</p>

<p>
For me (personally) that was the more important part of the paper, and not
clearly addressed by the Summit resolution.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Too inventive, too late, would really need a paper. Moved to NAD Future.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1056"></a>1056. Must all Engines and Distributions be Streamable?</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
Both the concepts <tt>RandomNumberEngine</tt> and <tt>RandomNumberDistribution</tt> have
requirements to be <tt>InputStreamable</tt> and <tt>OutputStreamable</tt>.
</p>
<p>
I have no problems leaving the WP in an inconsistent state on the best-faith
assumption these concepts will be provided later, however disagree with the
proposers that these constraints are not separable, orthogonal to the basic
concepts of generating random number distributions.
</p>
<p>
These constraints should be dropped, and applied to specific algorithms as
needed.
</p>
<p>
If a more refined concept (certainly deemed useful by the proposers) is
proposed there is no objection, but the basic concept should not require
persistence via streaming.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-31 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Working on constraining the stream iterators, I have a few more observations
to make on the concepts proposed while constraining the random number
facility.
</p>
<p>
While I still believe the concerns are orthogonal, I don't believe the
existing constraints go far enough either!  The goal we want to achieve is
not that a <tt>RandomNumberEngine</tt> / <tt>RandomNumberDistribution</tt> supports the stream
operators, but that it is <tt>Serializable</tt>.  I.e. there is a relationship
between the insert and extract operations that guarantees to restore the
state of the original object.  This implies a coupling of the concepts
together in a broader concept (<tt>Serializable</tt>) with at least one axiom to
assert the semantics.
</p>
<p>
One problem is that <tt>istream</tt> and <tt>ostream</tt> may be fundamentally different
types, although we can hook a relation if we are prepared to drop down to
the <tt>char</tt> type and <tt>char_traits</tt> template parameters.  Doing so ties us to a
form of serialization that demands implementation via the std iostreams
framework, which seems overly prescriptive.  I believe the goal is generally
to support serialization without regard to how it is expressed - although
this is getting even more inventive in terms of concepts we do not have
today.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-03 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I can't find the record in the wiki minutes, but it was agreed at both
Frankfurt and Santa Cruz that this issue is NAD.
</p>
<p>
The agreement in SC was that I would provide you with the rationale (see
below) to include when moving to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-03 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The issue suggests a more refined concept should be used if we want to
require streaming, to separate concerns from the basic
<tt>RandomNumberEngine</tt> behaviour.  In Frankfurt it was observed
that <tt>RandomNumberEngine</tt> <em>is</em> that more refined concept,
and the basic concept used in the framework is
<tt>UniformRandomNumberGenerator</tt>, which it refines.
</p>

<p>
We concur, and expect this to have no repurcussions re-writing this
clause now concepts are removed.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1057"></a>1057. <tt>RandomNumberEngineAdaptor</tt></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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The <tt>RandomNumberEngineAdaptor</tt> concept breaks precedent in the
way the library has been specified by grouping requirements into a
concept that is never actually used in the library.
</p>
<p>
This is undoubtedly a very helpful device for documentation, but we are not
comfortable with the precedent - especially as we have rejected national
body comments on the same grounds.
</p>
<p>
Suggest either removing the concept, or providing an algorithm/type that
requires this concept in their definition (such as a factory function to
create new engines).
</p>
<p>
The preference is to create a single new algorithm and retain the value of
the existing documentation.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Walter points out that it is unlikely that any algorithm would ever
require this concept, but that the concept nonetheless is useful as
documentation, and (via concept maps) as a means of checking specific adapters.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair disagrees as to the concept's value as documentation.
</p>
<p>
Marc points out that the <tt>RandomNumberDistribution</tt>
is also a concept not used elsewhere in the Standard.
</p>
<p>
Pete agrees that a policy of not inventing concepts
that aren't used in the Standard is a good starting point,
but should not be used as a criterion for rejecting a concept.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1058"></a>1058. New container issue</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
Sequence containers 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]:
</p>

<p>
The return value of new calls added to table 83 are not specified.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add after p6 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-6- ...
</p>
<p><ins>
The iterator returned from <tt>a.insert(p,rv)</tt> points to the copy of <tt>rv</tt>
inserted into <tt>a</tt>.
</ins></p>
<p><ins>
The iterator returned from <tt>a.emplace(p, args)</tt> points to the new
element constructed from <tt>args</tt> inserted into <tt>a</tt>.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1059"></a>1059. Usage of no longer existing FunctionType concept</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-13 <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">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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Due to a deliberate core language decision, the earlier called
"foundation" concept <tt>std::FunctionType</tt> had been removed in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2773.pdf">N2773</a>
shortly
before the first "conceptualized" version of the WP
(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2798.pdf">N2798</a>)
had been
prepared. This caused a break of the library, which already used this
concept in the adapted definition of <tt>std::function</tt>
(20.8 [function.objects]/2, header <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis and
20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]).
</p>
<p>
A simple fix would be to either (a) make <tt>std::function</tt>'s primary template
unconstrained or to (b) add constraints based on existing (support) concepts.
A more advanced fix would (c) introduce a new library concept.
</p>
<p>
The big disadvantage of (a) is, that users can define templates which
cause compiler errors during instantiation time because of under-constrainedness
and would thus violate the basic advantage of constrained
code.
</p>
<p>
For (b), the ideal constraints for <tt>std::function</tt>'s template parameter would
be one which excludes everything else but the single provided partial
specialization that matches every "free function" type (i.e. any function
type w/o cv-qualifier-seq and w/o ref-qualifier).
Expressing such a type as as single requirement would be written as
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename T&gt;
requires ReferentType&lt;T&gt; // Eliminate cv void and function types with cv-qual-seq
                         //   or ref-qual (depending on core issue #749)
      &amp;&amp; PointeeType&lt;T&gt;  // Eliminate reference types
      &amp;&amp; !ObjectType&lt;T&gt;  // Eliminate object types
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Just for completeness approach (c), which would make sense, if the
library has more reasons to constrain for free function types:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>auto concept FreeFunctionType&lt;typename T&gt;
  : ReferentType&lt;T&gt;, PointeeType&lt;T&gt;, MemberPointeeType&lt;T&gt;
{
  requires !ObjectType&lt;T&gt;;
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
I mention that approach because I expect that free function types belong
to the most natural type categories for every days coders. Potential
candidates in the library are <tt>addressof</tt> and class template <tt>packaged_task</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair would prefer to have a core-supported <tt>FunctionType</tt> concept
in order that any future changes be automatically correct
without need for a library solution to catch up;
he points to type traits as a precedent.
Further, he believes that a published concept can't in the future
be changed.
</p>
<p>
Bill feels this category of entity would change sufficiently slowly
that he would be willing to take the risk.
</p>
<p>
Of the discussed solutions, we tend toward option (c).
We like the idea of having a complete taxonomy of native types,
and perhaps erred in trimming the set.
</p>
<p>
We would like to have this issue reviewed by Core and would like
their feedback.  Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Change in 20.8 [function.objects]/2, Header <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>// 20.6.16 polymorphic function wrappers:
class bad_function_call;
template&lt;<del>FunctionType</del><ins>ReferentType F</ins>&gt;
<ins>requires PointeeType&lt;F&gt; &amp;&amp; !ObjectType&lt;F&gt;</ins>
class function; // undefined
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change in 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func]:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
template&lt;<del>FunctionType</del><ins>ReferentType F</ins>&gt;
<ins>requires PointeeType&lt;F&gt; &amp;&amp; !ObjectType&lt;F&gt;</ins>
class function; // undefined
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1060"></a>1060. Embedded nulls in NTBS</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.2.1.4.1 [byte.strings] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-13 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
Definition of null-terminated sequences allow for embedded nulls. This is
surprising, and probably not supportable with the intended use cases.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the issue, but believe this can be handled editorially.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1061"></a>1061. Bad indexing for tuple access to pair (Editorial?)</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.3.5.4 [pair.astuple] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-13 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The definition of <tt>get</tt> implies that <tt>get</tt> must return the second element if
given a negative integer.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
20.3.5.4 [pair.astuple] p5:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;<del>int</del> <ins>size_t</ins> I, class T1, class T2&gt; 
  requires True&lt;(I &lt; 2)&gt; 
  const P&amp; get(const pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp;);
</pre>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1062"></a>1062. Missing insert_iterator for stacks/queues</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.5.2 [insert.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-13 <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#insert.iterators">issues</a> in [insert.iterators].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
It is odd that we have an iterator to insert into a <tt>vector</tt>, but not an
iterator to insert into a <tt>vector</tt> that is adapted as a <tt>stack</tt>. The standard
container adapters all have a common interface to <tt>push</tt> and <tt>pop</tt> so it should
be simple to create an iterator adapter to complete the library support.
</p>

<p>
We should provide an <tt>AdaptedContainer</tt> concept supporting <tt>push</tt> and <tt>pop</tt>
operations. Create a new insert iterator and factory function that inserts
values into the container by calling <tt>push</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Walter recommends NAD Future.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open, and recommend deferring the issue until after the next
Committee Draft is issued.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-29 Howard moves to Tentatively NAD Future.
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
A poll on the LWG reflector voted unanimously to move this issue to Tentatively NAD Future.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.  The intent of these adapters are to restrict the interfaces.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1063"></a>1063. 03 iterator compatibilty</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.backward] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
Which header must a user <tt>#include</tt> to obtain the library-supplied
<tt>concept_maps</tt> declared in this paragraph?
</p>

<p>
This is important information, as existing user code will break if this
header is not included, and we should make a point of mandating this header
is <tt>#include</tt>-d by library headers likely to make use of it, notably
<tt>&lt;algorithm&gt;</tt>.  See issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1001">1001</a> for more details.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the direction of the proposed resolution.
Move to Tentatively Ready.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
We believe this is NAD Concepts, but this needs to be reviewed against the
post-remove-concepts draft.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>Change  [depr.lib.iterator.primitives], Iterator primitives, as
indicated:</i></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>To simplify the use of iterators and provide backward compatibility with
  previous C++ Standard Libraries,
  the library provides several classes and functions. <ins>Unless otherwise
  specified, these classes and functions shall be defined in header <tt>&lt;iterator&gt;</tt>.</ins></p>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Change X [iterator.backward], Iterator backward compatibility, as
indicated:</i></p>
<blockquote>
  <p>The library provides concept maps that allow iterators specified with
  <tt>iterator_traits</tt> to interoperate with
  algorithms that require iterator concepts. <ins>These concept maps shall be
  defined in the same header that defines the iterator.</ins> [<i>Example:</i></p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1064"></a>1064. Response to UK 152</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.3.18 [defns.obj.state] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 152</b></p>

<p>
Object state is using a definition of object (instance of a class) from
outside the standard, rather than the 'region of storage' definiton in
1.8 [intro.object]p1
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We think we're removing this; See X [func.referenceclosure.cons].
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD.  This will not affect user or implementer code
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1067"></a>1067. simplified wording for inner_product</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.7 [numeric.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-17 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
One of the motivating examples for introducing requirements-aliases was to
simplify the wording of the <tt>inner_product</tt> requirements.  As the paper
adopting the feature and constrained wording for the library went through in
the same meeting, it was not possible to make the change at the time.  The
simpler form should be adopted now though.  Similarly, most the other
numerical algorithms can benefit from a minor cleanup.
</p>
<p>
Note that in each case, the second more generalised form of the algorithm
does not benefit, as there are already named constraints supplied by the
template type parameters.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-02 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
one part of the suggested resolution suggests the removal of the
<tt>MoveConstructible&lt;T&gt;</tt> requirement from
<tt>inner_product</tt>. According to 26.7.2 [inner.product]
</p>

<blockquote>
Computes its result by initializing the accumulator <tt>acc</tt> with the
initial value <tt>init</tt>
</blockquote>

<p>
this step requires at least <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>.
</p>

<p>
Therefore I strongly suggest to take this removal back (Note also
that the corresponding overload with a functor argument still has
the same <tt>MoveConstructible&lt;T&gt;</tt> requirement).
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution as amended by Daniel's suggestion
to restore <tt>MoveConstructible</tt>,
reflected in the updated proposed resolution below.
</p>
<p>
Move to Tentatively Ready.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change in 26.7 [numeric.ops] and 26.7.1 [accumulate]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;InputIterator Iter, MoveConstructible T&gt;
 requires <ins>add =</ins> HasPlus&lt;T, Iter::reference&gt;
       &amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt;T, <del>HasPlus&lt;T, Iter::reference&gt;</del> <ins>add</ins>::result_type&gt;
 T accumulate(Iter first, Iter last, T init);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change in 26.7 [numeric.ops] and 26.7.2 [inner.product]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;InputIterator Iter1, InputIterator Iter2, MoveConstructible T&gt;
  requires <ins>mult =</ins> HasMultiply&lt;Iter1::reference, Iter2::reference&gt;
        &amp;&amp; <ins>add =</ins> HasPlus&lt;T, <del>HasMultiply&lt;Iter1::reference, Iter2::reference&gt;</del> <ins>mult</ins>::result_type&gt;
        &amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt; 
             T,
             <del>HasPlus&lt;T,
                     HasMultiply&lt;Iter1::reference, Iter2::reference&gt;::result_type&gt;</del> <ins>add</ins>::result_type&gt;
  T inner_product(Iter1 first1, Iter1 last1, Iter2 first2, T init);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change in 26.7 [numeric.ops] and 26.7.3 [partial.sum]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;InputIterator InIter, OutputIterator&lt;auto, const InIter::value_type&amp;&gt; OutIter&gt;
  requires <ins>add =</ins> HasPlus&lt;InIter::value_type, InIter::reference&gt;
        &amp;&amp; HasAssign&lt;InIter::value_type,
                     <del>HasPlus&lt;InIter::value_type, InIter::reference&gt;</del> <ins>add</ins>::result_type&gt;
        &amp;&amp; Constructible&lt;InIter::value_type, InIter::reference&gt;
  OutIter partial_sum(InIter first, InIter last, OutIter result);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change in 26.7 [numeric.ops] and 26.7.4 [adjacent.difference]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;InputIterator InIter, OutputIterator&lt;auto, const InIter::value_type&amp;&gt; OutIter&gt;
  requires <ins>sub =</ins> HasMinus&lt;InIter::value_type, InIter::value_type&gt;
        &amp;&amp; Constructible&lt;InIter::value_type, InIter::reference&gt;
        &amp;&amp; OutputIterator&lt;OutIter, <del>HasMinus&lt;InIter::value_type, InIter::value_type&gt;</del> <ins>sub</ins>::result_type&gt;
        &amp;&amp; MoveAssignable&lt;InIter::value_type&gt;
  OutIter adjacent_difference(InIter first, InIter last, OutIter result);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1068"></a>1068. class random_device should be movable</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.5.6 [rand.device] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-18 <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#rand.device">issues</a> in [rand.device].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
class <tt>random_device</tt> should be movable.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, and recommend this issue be deferred until after the next
Committee Draft is issued.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave open. Walter to provide drafting as part of his planned paper.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
WP is correct as written.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1069"></a>1069. class seed_seq should support efficient move operations</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-18 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
class <tt>seed_seq</tt> should support efficient move operations.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, and recommend this issue be deferred until after the next
Committee Draft is issued.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave open. Walter to provide drafting as part of his planned paper.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<tt>seed_seq</tt> is explicitly not copyable, so, much like LWG issue
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1068">1068</a>, LWG issue 1069 could be marked NAD to be consistent
with this.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1072"></a>1072. Is std::hash a constrained template or not?</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
Is <tt>std::hash</tt> a constrained template or not?
</p>
<p>
According to Class template hash 20.8.15 [unord.hash], the definition is:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T&gt;
struct hash : public std::unary_function&lt;T, std::size_t&gt; {
  std::size_t operator()(T val) const;
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
And so unconstrained.
</p>
<p>
According to the <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis in p2 Function objects
20.8 [function.objects] the template is declared as:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;ReferentType T&gt; struct hash;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
which would make hash a constrained template.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-03-22 Daniel provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair is not certain that Daniel's proposed resolution is sufficient,
and recommends we leave the hash template unconstrained for now.
</p>
<p>
Recommend that the Project Editor make the constrained declaration consistent
with the definition in order to make the Working Paper internally consistent,
and that the issue then be revisited.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
[To the editor: This resolution is merge-compatible to the
resolution of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1078">1078</a>]
</p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 20.8 [function.objects]/2, header <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis, change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.6.17, hash function base template:
template &lt;ReferentType T&gt; struct hash; <ins>// undefined</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 20.8.15 [unord.hash]/1 change as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
 <del>template &lt;class T&gt;
 struct hash : public std::unary_function&lt;T, std::size_t&gt; {
 std::size_t operator()(T val) const;
 };</del>
 <ins>template &lt;ReferentType T&gt; struct hash; // undefined</ins>
}
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 20.8.15 [unord.hash]/2 change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote>
-2-  <ins>For all library-provided specializations, the template
instantiation <tt>hash&lt;T&gt;</tt>
  shall provide a public <tt>operator()</tt> with return type <tt>std::size_t</tt> to
satisfy the concept
  requirement <tt>Callable&lt;const hash&lt;T&gt;, const T&amp;&gt;</tt>. If <tt>T</tt> is an object
type or reference to
  object, <tt>hash&lt;T&gt;</tt> shall be publicly derived from
<tt>std::unary_function&lt;T, std::size_t&gt;</tt>.
  </ins> 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.
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 18.7 [support.rtti]/1, header <tt>&lt;typeinfo&gt;</tt> synopsis change as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
  class type_info;
  class type_index;
  template &lt;<del>class</del><ins>ReferentType</ins> T&gt; struct hash;
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1074"></a>1074. concept map broken by N2840</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [allocator.element.concepts] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-19 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
p7 Allocator-related element concepts X [allocator.element.concepts]
</p>

<p>
The changes to the <tt>AllocatableElement</tt> concept mean this <tt>concept_map</tt>
specialization no longer matches the original concept:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;Allocator Alloc, class T, class ... Args&gt;
  requires HasConstructor&lt;T, Args...&gt;
    concept_map AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt; {
      void construct_element(Alloc&amp; a, T* t, Args&amp;&amp;... args) {
        Alloc::rebind&lt;T&gt;(a).construct(t, forward(args)...);
      }
    }
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-03-23 Pablo adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Actually, this is incorrect,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2840.pdf">N2840</a>
says. "In section 
X [allocator.element.concepts] paragraph 8, modify the definition of the
<tt>AllocatableElement</tt> concept and eliminate the related concept map:" but
then neglects to include the red-lined text of the concept map that was
to be eliminated. Pete also missed this, but I caught it he asked me to
review his edits.  Pete's updated WP removes the concept map entirely,
which was the original intent.  The issue is, therefore, moot.  Note, as
per my presentation of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2840.pdf">N2840</a>
in summit, <tt>construct()</tt> no longer has a
default implementation.  This regrettable fact was deemed (by David
Abrahams, Doug, and myself) to be preferable to the complexity of
providing a default implementation that would not under-constrain a more
restrictive allocator (like the scoped allocators).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-01 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
it seems to me that #1074 should be resolved as a NAD, because the
current WP has already removed the previous AllocatableElement concept map.
It introduced auto concept AllocatableElement instead, but as of
X [allocator.element.concepts]/7 this guy contains now
</p>
<blockquote><pre>requires FreeStoreAllocatable&lt;T&gt;;
void Alloc::construct(T*, Args&amp;&amp;...);
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The affected code is no longer part of the Working Draft.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change X [allocator.element.concepts]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;Allocator Alloc, class T, class ... Args&gt;
  requires HasConstructor&lt;T, Args...&gt;
    concept_map AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, T, Args&amp;&amp;...&gt; {
      void construct_element(<del>Alloc&amp; a,</del> T* t, Args&amp;&amp;... args) {
        Alloc::rebind&lt;T&gt;(a).construct(t, forward(args)...);
      }
    }
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1076"></a>1076. unary/binary_negate need constraining and move support</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.8.9 [negators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-20 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The class templates <tt>unary/binary_negate</tt> need constraining and move support.
</p>
<p>
Ideally these classes would be deprecated, allowing <tt>unary/binary_function</tt> to
also be deprecated.  However, until a generic negate adaptor is introduced
that can negate any <tt>Callable</tt> type, they must be supported so should be
constrained.  Likewise, they should be movable, and support adopting a
move-only predicate type.
</p>
<p>
In order to preserve ABI compatibility, new rvalue overloads are supplied in
preference to changing the existing pass-by-const-ref to pass-by-value.
</p>
<p>
Do not consider the issue of forwarding mutable lvalues at this point,
although remain open to another issue on the topic.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-01 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
IMO the currently proposed resolution needs some updates
because it is ill-formed at several places:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
<p>
In concept AdaptableUnaryFunction change
</p>
<blockquote><pre>typename X::result_type;
typename X::argument_type;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
to
</p>
<blockquote><pre>Returnable result_type = typename X::result_type;
typename argument_type = typename X::argument_type;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
[The replacement "Returnable result_type" instead of "typename
result_type" is non-editorial, but maybe you prefer that as well]
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In concept AdaptableBinaryFunction change
</p>
<blockquote><pre>typename X::result_type;
typename X::first_argument_type;
typename X::second_argument_type;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
to
</p>
<blockquote><pre>Returnable result_type = typename X::result_type;
typename first_argument_type = typename X::first_argument_type;
typename second_argument_type = typename X::second_argument_type;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
[The replacement "Returnable result_type" instead of "typename
result_type" is non-editorial, but maybe you prefer that as well.]
</p>
</li>

<li>
<p>
In class unary/binary_function
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
I suggest to change "ReturnType" to "Returnable" in both cases.
</li>
<li>
I think you want to replace the remaining occurrences of "Predicate" by "P"
(in both classes in copy/move from a predicate)
</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p>
I think you need to change the proposed signatures of not1 and not2, because
they would still remain unconstrained: To make them constrained at least a
single requirement needs to be added to enable requirement implication. This
could be done via a dummy ("requires True&lt;true&gt;") or just explicit as follows:
</p>
<ol type="a">
<li>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;AdaptableUnaryFunction P&gt;
requires Predicate&lt; P, P::argument_type&gt;
unary_negate&lt;P&gt; not1(const P&amp;&amp; pred);
template &lt;AdaptableUnaryFunction P&gt;
requires Predicate&lt; P, P::argument_type &gt;
unary_negate&lt;P&gt; not1(P&amp;&amp; pred);
</pre>
<blockquote>
-3- Returns: unary_negate&lt;P&gt;(pred).
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>
[Don't we want a move call for the second overload as in
</p>
<blockquote><pre>unary_negate&lt;P&gt;(std::move(pred))
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
in the Returns clause ?]
</p>
</li>
<li>
<pre>template &lt;AdaptableBinaryFunction P&gt;
requires Predicate&lt; P, P::first_argument_type, P::second_argument_type &gt;
binary_negate&lt;P&gt; not2(const P&amp; pred);
template &lt;AdaptableBinaryFunction P&gt;
requires Predicate&lt; P, P::first_argument_type, P::second_argument_type &gt;
binary_negate&lt;P&gt; not2(P&amp;&amp; pred);
</pre>
<p>
-5- Returns: binary_negate&lt;P&gt;(pred).
</p>
<p>
[Don't we want a move call for the second overload as in
</p>
<blockquote><pre>binary_negate&lt;P&gt;(std::move(pred))
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
in the Returns clause ?]
</p>
</li>
</ol>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
There is concern that complicating the solution
to preserve the ABI seems unnecessary,
since we're not in general preserving the ABI.
</p>
<p>
We would prefer a separate paper consolidating all Clause 20
issues that are for the purpose of providing constrained versions
of the existing facilities.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave open pending the potential move constructor paper. Note that
we consider the "constraining" part NAD Concepts.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-31 Alisdair removes the current proposed wording from the proposed
wording section because it is based on concepts.  That wording is proposed here:
]</i></p>


<blockquote class="note">
<p>
Add new concepts where appropriate::
</p>

<blockquote><pre>auto concept AdaptableUnaryFunction&lt; typename X &gt; {
  typename X::result_type;
  typename X::argument_type;
}

auto concept AdaptableBinaryFunction&lt; typename X &gt; {
  typename X::result_type;
  typename X::first_argument_type;
  typename X::second_argument_type;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Revise as follows:
</p>

<p>
Base X [base] (Only change is constrained Result)
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1-  The following classes are provided to simplify the typedefs of the
argument and result types:
</p>
<pre>namespace std {
  template &lt;class Arg, <del>class</del> <ins>ReturnType</ins> Result&gt;
  struct unary_function {
     typedef Arg    argument_type;
     typedef Result result_type;
  };

  template &lt;class Arg1, class Arg2, <del>class</del> <ins>ReturnType</ins> Result&gt;
  struct binary_function {
     typedef Arg1   first_argument_type;
     typedef Arg2   second_argument_type;
     typedef Result result_type;
  };
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Negators 20.8.9 [negators]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
-1- Negators <tt>not1</tt> and <tt>not2</tt> take a unary and a binary predicate,
respectively, and return their complements (5.3.1).
</p>

<pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> <ins>AdaptableUnaryFunction</ins> P<del>redicate</del>&gt;
  <ins>requires Predicate&lt; P, P::argument_type &gt;</ins>
  class unary_negate
    : public unary_function&lt;<del>typename</del> P<del>redicate</del>::argument_type,bool&gt; {
  public:
    <ins>unary_negate(const unary_negate &amp; ) = default;</ins>
    <ins>unary_negate(unary_negate &amp;&amp; );</ins>

    <ins>requires CopyConstructible&lt; P &gt;</ins>
       explicit unary_negate(const Predicate&amp; pred); 
    <ins>requires MoveConstructible&lt; P &gt;
       explicit unary_negate(Predicate &amp;&amp; pred);</ins>

    bool operator()(const <del>typename</del> P<del>redicate</del>::argument_type&amp; x) const;
  };
</pre>
<blockquote>
-2 <tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt>!pred(x)</tt>.
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class Predicate&gt;
  unary_negate&lt;Predicate&gt; not1(const Predicate&amp;amp; pred);
<ins>template &lt;class Predicate&gt;
  unary_negate&lt;Predicate&gt; not1(Predicate&amp;&amp; pred);</ins>
</pre>
<blockquote>
-3-  <i>Returns:</i> <tt>unary_negate&lt;Predicate&gt;(pred)</tt>.
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;<del>class</del> <ins>AdaptableBinaryFunction</ins> P<del>redicate</del> &gt;
  <ins>requires Predicate&lt; P, P::first_argument_type, P::second_argument_type &gt;</ins>
  class binary_negate
    : public binary_function&lt;<del>typename</del> P<del>redicate</del>::first_argument_type,
                              <del>typename</del> P<del>redicate</del>::second_argument_type, bool&gt; {
  public:
    <ins>biary_negate(const binary_negate &amp; ) = default;</ins>
    <ins>binary_negate(binary_negate &amp;&amp; );</ins>

    <ins>requires CopyConstructible&lt; P &gt;</ins>
       explicit binary_negate(const Predicate&amp; pred);
    <ins>requires MoveConstructible&lt; P &gt;
       explicit binary_negate(const Predicate&amp; pred);</ins>

    bool operator()(const <del>typename</del> P<del>redicate</del>::first_argument_type&amp; x,
                    const <del>typename</del> P<del>redicate</del>::second_argument_type&amp; y) const;
  };
</pre>
<blockquote>
-4- <tt>operator()</tt> returns <tt>!pred(x,y)</tt>.
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class Predicate&gt;
  binary_negate&lt;Predicate&gt; not2(const Predicate&amp; pred);
<ins>template &lt;class Predicate&gt;
  binary_negate&lt;Predicate&gt; not2(Predicate&amp;&amp; pred);</ins>
</pre>

<blockquote>
-5- <i>Returns:</i> <tt>binary_negate&lt;Predicate&gt;(pred)</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>


<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD Concepts.  The move-semantic part has been addressed by a core language change, which implicitly generates appropriate move constructors and move-assignment operators.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1077"></a>1077. Nonesense <tt>tuple</tt> declarations</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Pete Becker <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Class template tuple 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
  requires Constructible&lt;Types, const UTypes&amp;&gt;...
template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
  requires Constructible&lt;Types, RvalueOf&lt;UTypes&gt;::type&gt;...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Somebody needs to look at this and say what it should be.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-03-21 Daniel provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
The resolution looks correct; move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple], class <tt>tuple</tt>, change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
  requires Constructible&lt;Types, const UTypes&amp;&gt;...
  <ins>tuple(const pair&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;);</ins>
template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
  requires Constructible&lt;Types, RvalueOf&lt;UTypes&gt;::type&gt;...
  <ins>tuple(pair&lt;UTypes...&gt;&amp;&amp;);</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
[NB.: The corresponding prototypes do already exist in 20.4.2.1 [tuple.cnstr]/7+8]
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1078"></a>1078. DE-17: Remove class type_index</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.13 [type.index] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Doug Gregor <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-20 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses DE 17</b></p>

<p>
DE-17: 
</p>
<p>
The class <tt>type_index</tt> should be removed; it provides no additional
functionality beyond providing appropriate concept maps.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-03-31 Peter adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
It is not true, in principle, that <tt>std::type_index</tt> provides no  utility
compared to bare <tt>std::type_info*</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<tt>std::type_index</tt> can avoid the lifetime issues with <tt>type_info</tt> when  the
DLL that has produced the <tt>type_info</tt> object is unloaded. A raw
<tt>type_info*</tt> does not, and cannot, provide any protection in this  case.
A <tt>type_index</tt> can (if the implementor so chooses) because it  can wrap a
smart (counted or even cloning) pointer to the <tt>type_info</tt>  data that is
needed for <tt>name()</tt> and <tt>before()</tt> to work.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>Modify the header &lt;typeinfo&gt; synopsis in 
  18.7 [support.rtti]p1 as follows:</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std { 
  class type_info; 
  <del>class type_index;</del>
  template &lt;class T&gt; struct hash;
  template&lt;&gt; struct hash&lt;<del>type_index</del><ins>const type_info *</ins>&gt; : public std::unary_function&lt;<del>type_index</del><ins>const type_info *</ins>, size_t&gt; {
    size_t operator()(<del>type_index</del><ins>const type_info *</ins> <del>index</del><ins>t</ins>) const;
  }<ins>;</ins>
  <ins>concept_map LessThanComparable&lt;const type_info *&gt; <i>see below</i></ins>
  class bad_cast; 
  class bad_typeid;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>Add the following new subsection</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
<ins>18.7.1.1 Template specialization <code>hash&lt;const type_info *&gt;</code>
[type.info.hash]</ins></p>

<pre><ins>size_t operator()(const type_info *x) const;</ins>
</pre>
<ol>
<li><ins><i>Returns</i>: <code>x-&gt;hash_code()</code></ins></li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

 <p>Add the following new subsection</p>
 <blockquote>
<p><ins>18.7.1.2 <code>type_info</code> concept map [type.info.concepts]</ins></p>


<pre><ins>concept_map LessThanComparable&lt;const type_info *&gt; {</ins>
  <ins>bool operator&lt;(const type_info *x, const type_info *y) { return x-&gt;before(*y); }</ins>
  <ins>bool operator&lt;=(const type_info *x, const type_info *y) { return !y-&gt;before(*x); }</ins>
  <ins>bool operator&gt;(const type_info *x, const type_info *y) { return y-&gt;before(*x); }</ins>
  <ins>bool operator&gt;=(const type_info *x, const type_info *y) { return !x-&gt;before(*y); }</ins>
<ins>}</ins>
</pre>
<ol>
  <li><ins><i>Note</i>: provides a well-defined ordering among
  <code>type_info const</code> pointers, which makes such pointers
  usable in associative containers (23.4).</ins></li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p>Remove section 20.13 [type.index]</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1080"></a>1080. Concept ArithmeticLike should provide explicit boolean  conversion</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [concept.arithmetic] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-21 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Astonishingly, the current concept ArithmeticLike as specified in
X [concept.arithmetic] does not provide explicit conversion
to <tt>bool</tt> although this is a common property of arithmetic types
(4.12 [conv.bool]). Recent proposals that introduced such types
(integers of arbitrary precision,
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2143.pdf">n2143</a>,
decimals
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2732.pdf">n2732</a>
indirectly
via conversion to <tt>long long</tt>) also took care of such a feature.
</p>
<p>
Adding such an explicit conversion associated function would also
partly solve a currently invalid effects clause in library, which bases
on this property, 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]/2:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>{ difference_type m = n;
 if (m &gt;= 0) while (m--) ++r;
 else while (m++) --r;
 return r; }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Both while-loops take advantage of a contextual conversion to <tt>bool</tt>
(Another problem is that the &gt;= comparison uses the no
longer supported existing implicit conversion from <tt>int</tt> to <tt>IntegralLike</tt>).
</p>

<b>Original proposed resolution:</b>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In X [concept.arithmetic], add to the list of less refined
concepts one further concept:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept ArithmeticLike&lt;typename T&gt;
  : Regular&lt;T&gt;, LessThanComparable&lt;T&gt;, HasUnaryPlus&lt;T&gt;, HasNegate&lt;T&gt;,
    HasPlus&lt;T, T&gt;, HasMinus&lt;T, T&gt;, HasMultiply&lt;T, T&gt;, HasDivide&lt;T, T&gt;,
    HasPreincrement&lt;T&gt;, HasPostincrement&lt;T&gt;, HasPredecrement&lt;T&gt;,
    HasPostdecrement&lt;T&gt;,
    HasPlusAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;, HasMinusAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;,
    HasMultiplyAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;,
    HasDivideAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;<ins>, ExplicitlyConvertible&lt;T, bool&gt;</ins> {
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]/2 change the current effects clause
as indicated [The proposed insertion fixes the problem that the previous
implicit construction from integrals has been changed to an explicit
constructor]:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>{ difference_type m = n;
 if (m &gt;= <ins>difference_type(</ins>0<ins>)</ins>) while (m--) ++r;
 else while (m++) --r;
 return r; }
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree that arithmetic types ought be convertible to <tt>bool</tt>,
and we therefore agree with the proposed resolution's paragraph 1.
</p>
<p>
We do not agree that the cited effects clause is invalid,
as it expresses intent rather than specific code.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review, pending input from concepts experts.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In X [concept.arithmetic], add to the list of less refined
concepts one further concept:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept ArithmeticLike&lt;typename T&gt;
  : Regular&lt;T&gt;, LessThanComparable&lt;T&gt;, HasUnaryPlus&lt;T&gt;, HasNegate&lt;T&gt;,
    HasPlus&lt;T, T&gt;, HasMinus&lt;T, T&gt;, HasMultiply&lt;T, T&gt;, HasDivide&lt;T, T&gt;,
    HasPreincrement&lt;T&gt;, HasPostincrement&lt;T&gt;, HasPredecrement&lt;T&gt;,
    HasPostdecrement&lt;T&gt;,
    HasPlusAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;, HasMinusAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;,
    HasMultiplyAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;,
    HasDivideAssign&lt;T, const T&amp;&gt;<ins>, ExplicitlyConvertible&lt;T, bool&gt;</ins> {
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1081"></a>1081. Response to UK 216</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 21 [strings] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 216, JP 46, JP 48</b></p>

<p>
All the containers use concepts for their iterator usage, exect for
<tt>basic_string</tt>. This needs fixing.
</p>

<p>
Use concepts for iterator template parameters throughout the chapter.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
NB comments to be handled by Dave Abrahams and Howard Hinnant with
advice from PJP: UK216 (which duplicates) JP46, JP48. JP46 supplies
extensive proposed wording; start there.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1082"></a>1082. Response to JP 49</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22 [localization] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP 49</b></p>

<p>
<tt>codecvt</tt> does not use concept. For example, create <tt>CodeConvert</tt>
concept and change as follows.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;CodeConvert Codecvt, class Elem = wchar_t&gt;
  class wstring_convert {
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
To be handled by Howard Hinnant, Dave Abrahams, Martin Sebor, PJ Plauger.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1083"></a>1083. Response to JP 52, 53</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 22 [localization] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP 52, JP 53</b></p>

<p>
<tt>InputIterator</tt> does not use concept.
</p>

<p>
<tt>OutputIterator</tt> does not use concept.
</p>

<p>
Comments include proposed wording.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
To be handled by Howard Hinnant, Dave Abrahams, Martin Sebor, PJ Plauger.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1084"></a>1084. Response to UK 250</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 250</b></p>

<p>
A default implementation should be supplied for the post-increment
operator to simplify implementation of iterators by users.
</p>

<p>
Copy the Effects clause into the concept description as the default
implementation. Assumes a default value for postincrement_result
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Howard will open an issue.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-06-07 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This issue cannot currently be resolved as suggested, because
that would render auto-detection of the return type
<tt>postincrement_result</tt> invalid, see  [concept.map.assoc]/4+5. The
best fix would be to add a default type to that associated type, but
unfortunately any default type will prevent auto-deduction of types of
associated functions as quoted above. A corresponding core issue
is in preparation.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>[
This wording assumes the acceptance of UK 251 / <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1009">1009</a>.  Both
wordings change the same paragraphs.
]</i></p>


<p>
Change 24.2.5 [forward.iterators]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>concept ForwardIterator&lt;typename X&gt; : InputIterator&lt;X&gt;, Regular&lt;X&gt; { 

  MoveConstructible postincrement_result;
  requires HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;
        &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;HasDereference&lt;postincrement_result&gt;::result_type, const value_type&amp;&gt;;

  postincrement_result operator++(X&amp; r, int)<del>;</del> <ins>{
     X tmp = r;
     ++r;
     return tmp;
  }</ins>

  axiom MultiPass(X a, X b) { 
    if (a == b) *a == *b; 
    if (a == b) ++a == ++b; 
  } 
}
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1085"></a>1085. Response to UK 258</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 258</b></p>

<p>
A default implementation should be supplied for the post-decrement
operator to simplify implementation of iterators by users.
</p>

<p>
Copy the Effects clause into the concept description as the default
implementation. Assumes a default value for postincrement_result
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Howard will open an issue.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-06-07 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This issue cannot currently be resolved as suggested, because
that would render auto-detection of the return type
<tt>postdecrement_result</tt> invalid, see <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1084">1084</a>.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Change 24.2.6 [bidirectional.iterators]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>concept BidirectionalIterator&lt;typename X&gt; : ForwardIterator&lt;X&gt; { 
  MoveConstructible postdecrement_result; 
  requires HasDereference&lt;postdecrement_result&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;HasDereference&lt;postdecrement_result&gt;::result_type, const value_type&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;postdecrement_result, const X&amp;&gt;; 
  X&amp; operator--(X&amp;); 
  postdecrement_result operator--(X&amp; <ins>r</ins>, int)<del>;</del> <ins>{
     X tmp = r;
     --r;
     return tmp;
  }</ins>
}
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1086"></a>1086. Response to UK 284</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6 [stream.iterators] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-22 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 284</b></p>

<p>
The stream iterators need constraining with concepts/requrires clauses.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree. To be handled by Howard, Martin and PJ.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1087"></a>1087. Response to UK 301</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 301</b></p>

<p>
<tt>replace</tt> and <tt>replace_if</tt> have the requirement: <tt>OutputIterator&lt;Iter,
Iter::reference&gt;</tt> Which implies they need to copy some values in the
range the algorithm is iterating over. This is not however the case, the
only thing that happens is <tt>const T&amp;</tt>s might be copied over existing
elements (hence the <tt>OutputIterator&lt;Iter, const T&amp;&gt;</tt>.
</p>

<p>
Remove <tt>OutputIterator&lt;Iter, Iter::reference&gt;</tt> from <tt>replace</tt>
and <tt>replace_if</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree. To be handled by Howard.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change in  [algorithms.syn] and 25.3.5 [alg.replace]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, class T&gt; 
  requires <del>OutputIterator&lt;Iter, Iter::reference&gt; 
        &amp;&amp;</del> OutputIterator&lt;Iter, const T&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; HasEqualTo&lt;Iter::value_type, T&gt; 
  void replace(Iter first, Iter last, 
               const T&amp; old_value, const T&amp; new_value); 

template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, Predicate&lt;auto, Iter::value_type&gt; Pred, class T&gt; 
  requires <del>OutputIterator&lt;Iter, Iter::reference&gt; 
        &amp;&amp;</del> OutputIterator&lt;Iter, const T&amp;&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt; 
  void replace_if(Iter first, Iter last,
                  Pred pred, const T&amp; new_value);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1088"></a>1088. Response to UK 342</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-22 <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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses UK 342</b></p>

<p>
<tt>std::promise</tt> is missing a non-member overload of <tt>swap</tt>. This is
inconsistent with other types that provide a <tt>swap</tt> member function.
</p>

<p>
Add a non-member overload <tt>void swap(promise&amp;&amp; x,promise&amp;&amp; y){ x.swap(y); }</tt>
</p>

<p><i>[
Summit:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Create an issue. Move to review, attention: Howard. Detlef will also
look into it.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Post Summit Daniel provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 30.6.5 [futures.promise], before p.1, immediately after class template
promise add:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
template &lt;class R&gt;
void swap(promise&lt;R&gt;&amp; x, promise&lt;R&gt;&amp; y);
</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 30.6.5 [futures.promise]/10 as indicated (to fix a circular definition):
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
-10- <i>Effects:</i> <del>swap(*this, other)</del><ins>Swaps the associated state
of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>other</tt></ins>
</p>
<p>
<ins><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
After the last paragraph in 30.6.5 [futures.promise] add the following
prototype description:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
template &lt;class R&gt;
void swap(promise&lt;R&gt;&amp; x, promise&lt;R&gt;&amp; y);
</ins></pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<ins><i>Effects:</i> <tt>x.swap(y)</tt></ins>
</p>
<p>
<ins><i>Throws:</i> Nothing.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>

</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1090"></a>1090. Missing description of <tt>packaged_task</tt> member <tt>swap</tt>,  missing non-member <tt>swap</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Class template <tt>packaged_task</tt> in 30.6.10 [futures.task] shows a member <tt>swap</tt>
declaration, but misses to
document it's effects (No prototype provided). Further on this class
misses to provide a non-member
swap.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair notes that paragraph 2 of the proposed resolution has already been
applied in the current Working Draft.
</p>
<p>
We note a pending <tt>future</tt>-related paper by Detlef;
we would like to wait for this paper before proceeding.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-24 Daniel removed part 2 of the proposed resolution.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Tentatively Ready, removing bullet 3 from the proposed
resolution but keeping the other two bullets.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 30.6.10 [futures.task], immediately after the definition of class
template packaged_task add:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
template&lt;class R, class... Argtypes&gt;
void swap(packaged_task&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;, packaged_task&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;);
</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

<ol start="4">

<li>
<p>
At the end of 30.6.10 [futures.task] (after p. 20), add add the following
prototype description:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>
template&lt;class R, class... Argtypes&gt;
void swap(packaged_task&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp; x, packaged_task&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp; y);
</ins></pre>
<blockquote>
<p><ins>
<i>Effects:</i> <tt>x.swap(y)</tt>
</ins></p>
<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1091"></a>1091. Multimap description confusing</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6.2.2 [multimap.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-22 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 246</b></p>
<p>
The content of this sub-clause is purely trying to describe in words the
effect of the requires clauses on these operations, now that we have
Concepts. As such, the description is more confusing than the signature
itself. The semantic for these functions is adequately covered in the
requirements tables in 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts].
</p>

<p><i>[
Beman adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Pete is clearly right that
this one is technical rather than editorial.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD, solved by removing concepts.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Strike 23.6.2.2 [multimap.modifiers] entirely
(but do NOT strike these signatures from the class template definition!).
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1092"></a>1092. Class template <tt>integral_constant</tt> should be a  constrained template</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
A first step to change the type traits predicates to constrained templates is to
constrain their common base template <tt>integral_constant</tt>. This can be done,
without enforcing depending classes to be constrained as well, but not
vice versa
without brute force <tt>late_check</tt> usages. The following proposed resolution depends
on the resolution of LWG issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1019">1019</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, pending a paper that looks at constraints
for the entirety of the type traits
and their relationship to the foundation concepts.
We recommend this be deferred
until after the next Committee Draft is issued.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop], Header <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt>
synopsis change as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
// 20.5.3, helper class:
template &lt;<del>class</del><ins>IntegralConstantExpressionType</ins> T, T v&gt; struct integral_constant;
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 20.7.3 [meta.help] change as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;<del>class</del><ins>IntegralConstantExpressionType</ins> T, T v&gt;
struct integral_constant {
  static constexpr T value = v;
  typedef T value_type;
  typedef integral_constant&lt;T,v&gt; type;
  constexpr operator value_type() { return value; }
};
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1093"></a>1093. Multiple definitions for random_shuffle algorithm</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
There are a couple of issues with the declaration of the <tt>random_shuffle</tt>
algorithm accepting a random number engine.
</p>

<ol type="i">
<li>
The Iterators must be shuffle iterators, yet this requirement is missing.
</li>
<li>
The <tt>RandomNumberEngine</tt> concept is now provided by the random number
library
(<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">n2836</a>)
and the placeholder should be removed.
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
2009-05-02 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
this issue completes adding necessary requirement to the
third new <tt>random_shuffle</tt> overload. The current suggestion is:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;RandomAccessIterator Iter, UniformRandomNumberGenerator Rand&gt;
requires ShuffleIterator&lt;Iter&gt;
void random_shuffle(Iter first, Iter last, Rand&amp;&amp; g);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
IMO this is still insufficient and I suggest to add the requirement
</p>
<blockquote><pre>Convertible&lt;Rand::result_type, Iter::difference_type&gt;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
to the list (as the two other overloads already have).
</p>

<p>
Rationale:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Its true that this third overload is somewhat different from the remaining
two. Nevertheless we know from <tt>UniformRandomNumberGenerator</tt>, that
it's <tt>result_type</tt> is an integral type and that it satisfies
<tt>UnsignedIntegralLike&lt;result_type&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p>
To realize it's designated task, the algorithm has to invoke the
<tt>Callable</tt> aspect of <tt>g</tt> and needs to perform some algebra involving
it's <tt>min()/max()</tt> limits to compute another index value that
at this point is converted into <tt>Iter::difference_type</tt>. This is so,
because 24.2.7 [random.access.iterators] uses this type as argument
of it's algebraic operators. Alternatively consider the equivalent
iterator algorithms in 24.4.4 [iterator.operations] with the same result.
</p>
<p>
This argument leads us to the conclusion that we also need
<tt>Convertible&lt;Rand::result_type, Iter::difference_type&gt;</tt> here.
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Alisdair notes that point (ii) has already been addressed.
</p>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution to point (i)
with Daniel's added requirement.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-06-05 Daniel updated proposed wording as recommended in Batavia.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07-28 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Revert to Open, with a note there is consensus on direction but the
wording needs updating to reflect removal of concepts.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Leave Open, Walter to work on it.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD Editorial, solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3056.pdf">N3056</a>.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3056.pdf">N3056</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change in  [algorithms.syn] and 25.3.12 [alg.random.shuffle]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>concept UniformRandomNumberGenerator&lt;typename Rand&gt; { }</del>
template&lt;RandomAccessIterator Iter, UniformRandomNumberGenerator Rand&gt;
  <ins>requires ShuffleIterator&lt;Iter&gt; &amp;&amp;
  Convertible&lt;Rand::result_type, Iter::difference_type&gt;</ins>
  void random_shuffle(Iter first, Iter last, Rand&amp;&amp; g);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1096"></a>1096. unconstrained rvalue ref parameters</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-21 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
TODO: Look at all cases of unconstrained rvalue ref parameters and check
that concept req'ts work when <tt>T</tt> deduced as reference.
</p>

<p>
 We found some instances where that was not done correctly and we figure
   the possibility of deducing <tt>T</tt> to be an lvalue reference was probably
   overlooked elsewhere.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, pending proposed wording from Dave for further review.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1099"></a>1099. Various issues</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-03-21 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Notes
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
[2009-03-21 Sat] p. 535 at the top we need MoveConstructible V1,
MoveConstructible V2 (where V1,V2 are defined on 539).  Also make_tuple
on 550
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
CD-1 reads:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;MoveConstructible T1, MoveConstructible T2&gt; 
pair&lt;V1, V2&gt; make_pair(T1&amp;&amp;, T2&amp;&amp;); 
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Actually I'm guessing we need something like <tt>MoveConstructible&lt;V1,T1&gt;</tt>,
i.e. "<tt>V1</tt> can be constructed from an rvalue of type <tt>T1</tt>."
</p>

<p>
Ditto for <tt>make_tuple</tt>
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
[2009-03-21 Sat] p1183 thread ctor, and in general, we need a way to
talk about "copiable from generalized rvalue ref argument" for cases
where we're going to forward and copy.  
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
   This issue may well be quite large.  Language in para 4 about "if
   an lvalue" is wrong because types aren't expressions.
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Maybe we should define the term "move" so we can just say in the
effects, "<tt>f</tt> is moved into the newly-created thread" or something, and
agree (and ideally document) that saying "<tt>f</tt> is moved" implies 
</p>

<blockquote><pre>F x(move(f))
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
is required to work.  That would cover both ctors at once.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
   p1199, call_once has all the same issues.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
[2009-03-21 Sat] p869 InputIterator pointer type should not be required
to be convertible to const value_type*, rather it needs to have a
operator-&gt; of its own that can be used for the value type.
</p>

<blockquote>
This one is serious and unrelated to the move issue.
</blockquote>

<p>
[2009-03-21 Sat] p818 stack has the same problem with default ctor.
</p>
<p>
[2009-03-21 Sat] p816 priority_queue has the same sorts of problems as queue, only more so
</p>
<blockquote><pre>   requires MoveConstructible&lt;Cont&gt; 
     explicit priority_queue(const Compare&amp; x = Compare(), Cont&amp;&amp; = Cont()); 
</pre>
<p>
   Don't require MoveConstructible when default constructing Cont.
   Also missing semantics for move ctor.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
 [2009-03-21 Sat] Why are Allocators required to be CopyConstructible as
 opposed to MoveConstructible?
</p>
<p>
 [2009-03-21 Sat] p813 queue needs a separate default ctor (Cont needn't
 be MoveConstructible).  No documented semantics for move c'tor.  Or
 *any* of its 7 ctors!
</p>
<p>
 [2009-03-21 Sat] std::array should have constructors for C++0x,
 consequently must consider move construction.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-05-01 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This could be done as part of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1035">1035</a>, which already handles
deviation of <tt>std::array</tt> from container tables.
</blockquote>

<p>
 [2009-03-21 Sat] p622 all messed up.
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
   para 8 "implementation-defined" is the wrong term; should be "see
   below" or something.  
</p>
<p>
   para 12 "will be selected" doesn't make any sense because we're not
   talking about actual arg types.
</p>
<p>
   paras 9-13 need to be totally rewritten for concepts.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
 [2009-03-21 Sat] Null pointer comparisons (p587) have all become
 unconstrained.  Need to fix that
</p>
<p>
 [2009-03-21 Sat] mem_fun_t etc. definition doesn't match declaration.
  We think CopyConstructible is the right reqt.
</p>
<p>
 make_pair needs Constructible&lt;V1, T1&amp;&amp;&gt; requirements!
</p>
<p>
 make_tuple needs something similar
</p>
<p>
 tuple bug in synopsis:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>   template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
   requires Constructible&lt;Types, const UTypes&amp;&gt;...
   template &lt;class... UTypes&gt;
   requires Constructible&lt;Types, RvalueOf&lt;UTypes&gt;::type&gt;...
</pre>
<p>
   Note: removal of MoveConstructible requirements in std::function makes
   these routines unconstrained!
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-02 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This part of the issue is already covered by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1077">1077</a>.
</blockquote>

<p>
 these unique_ptr constructors are broken [ I think this is covered in "p622 all messed up" ]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> unique_ptr(pointer p, implementation-defined d);
 unique_ptr(pointer p, implementation-defined d);
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
 multimap range constructor should not have MoveConstructible&lt;value_type&gt; requirement.
</p>
<blockquote>
   same with insert(..., P&amp;&amp;); multiset has the same issue, as do
   unordered_multiset and unordered_multimap. Review these!
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open, pending proposed wording from Dave for further review.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Tentatively NAD.  We are not sure what has been addressed and what hasn't.
Recommend closing unless someone sorts this out into something more readable.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The issue(s) at hand not adequately communicated.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1101"></a>1101. <tt>unique</tt> requirements</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
From Message c++std-core-14160 Howard wrote:
</p>

<blockquote>
It was the intent of the rvalue reference proposal for unique to only require MoveAssignable:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1860.html#25.2.9%20-%20Unique">N1860</a>.
</blockquote>

<p>
And Pete replied:
</p>

<blockquote>
That was overridden by the subsequent changes made for concepts in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2573.pdf">N2573</a>,
which reimposed the C++03 requirements.
</blockquote>

<p>
My impression is that this overwrite was a simple (unintentional) mistake.
Wording below to correct it.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Howard notes this issue resolves a discrepancy between the synopsis
and the description.
</p>
<p>
Move to NAD Editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 25.3.9 [alg.unique]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt;Iter, <ins>RvalueOf&lt;</ins>Iter::reference<ins>&gt;::type</ins>&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; EqualityComparable&lt;Iter::value_type&gt; 
  Iter unique(Iter first, Iter last); 

template&lt;ForwardIterator Iter, EquivalenceRelation&lt;auto, Iter::value_type&gt; Pred&gt; 
  requires OutputIterator&lt;Iter, RvalueOf&lt;Iter::reference&gt;::type&gt; 
        &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt; 
  Iter unique(Iter first, Iter last, Pred pred);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Note that the synopsis in  [algorithms.syn] is already correct.
</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1102"></a>1102. <tt>std::vector</tt>'s reallocation policy still unclear</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-20 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I have the impression that even the wording of current draft
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2857.pdf">N2857</a>
does insufficiently express the intent of <tt>vector</tt>'s
reallocation strategy. This has produced not too old library
implementations which release memory in the <tt>clear()</tt> function
and even modern articles about C++ programming cultivate
the belief that <tt>clear</tt> is allowed to do exactly this. A typical
example is something like this:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>const int buf_size = ...;
std::vector&lt;T&gt; buf(buf_size);
for (int i = 0; i &lt; some_condition; ++i) {
  buf.resize(buf_size);
  write_or_read_data(buf.data());
  buf.clear(); // Ensure that the next round get's 'zeroed' elements
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
where still the myth is ubiquitous that <tt>buf</tt> might be
allowed to reallocate it's memory *inside* the <tt>for</tt> loop.
</p>
<p>
IMO the problem is due to the fact, that
</p>

<ol type="a">
<li>
the actual memory-reallocation stability of <tt>std::vector</tt>
is explained in 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/3 and /6 which
are describing just the effects of the <tt>reserve</tt>
function, but in many examples (like above) there
is no explicit call to <tt>reserve</tt> involved. Further-more
23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/6 does only mention <em>insertions</em>
and never mentions the consequences of erasing
elements.
</li>
<li>
<p>
the effects clause of <tt>std::vector</tt>'s <tt>erase</tt> overloads in
23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers]/4 is silent about capacity changes. This
easily causes a misunderstanding, because the counter
parting insert functions described in 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers]/2
explicitly say, that
</p>
<blockquote>
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.
</blockquote>
<p>
It requires a complex argumentation chain about four
different places in the standard to provide the - possibly
weak - proof that calling <tt>clear()</tt> also does <em>never</em> change
the capacity of the <tt>std::vector</tt> container. Since <tt>std::vector</tt>
is the de-facto replacement of C99's dynamic arrays this
type is near to a built-in type and it's specification should
be clear enough that usual programmers can trust their
own reading.
</p>
</li>
</ol>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Bill believes paragraph 1 of the proposed resolution is unnecessary
because it is already implied (even if tortuously) by the current wording.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD. Rationale: there is no consensus to clarify the standard,
general consensus that the standard is correct as written.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p><i>[
This is a minimum version. I also
suggest that the wording explaining the allocation strategy
of <tt>std::vector</tt> in 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/3 and /6 is moved into
a separate sub paragraph of 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] <em>before</em>
any of the prototype's are discussed, but I cannot provide
reasonable wording changes now
]</i></p>


<ol>
<li>
<p>
Change 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/6 as follows:
</p>
<blockquote>
It is guaranteed that no reallocation takes place during
insertions <ins>or erasures</ins> that happen after a call
to <tt>reserve()</tt> until the time when an insertion would make
the size of the vector greater than the value of <tt>capacity()</tt>.
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 23.4.1.4 [vector.modifiers]/4 as follows:
</p>
<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> <ins>The capacity shall remain unchanged and no reallocation shall
happen.</ins>
Invalidates iterators and references at or after the point
of the erase.
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1105"></a>1105. Shouldn't <tt>Range</tt> be an <tt>auto concept</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.concepts.range] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-23 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><i>[
2009-04-26 Herb adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Here's a common example: We have many ISV customers who have built lots of
in-house STL-like containers. Imagine that, for the past ten years, the user
has been happily using his <tt>XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt;</tt> that has <tt>begin()</tt> and <tt>end()</tt>
and an iterator typedef, and indeed satisfies nearly all of <tt>Container</tt>,
though maybe not quite all just like <tt>valarray</tt>. The user upgrades to a
range-enabled version of a library, and now <tt>lib_algo( xyz.begin(), xyz.end());</tt>
no longer works -- compiler error.
</p>
<p>
Even though <tt>XYZCorpContainer</tt> matches the pre-conceptized version of the
algorithm, and has been working for years, it appears the user has to write
at least this:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class T&gt; concept_map Range&lt;XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt;&gt; {};

template&lt;class T&gt; concept_map Range&lt;const XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt;&gt; {};
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Is that correct?
</p>
<p>
But he may actually have to write this as we do for initializer list:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class T&gt;
concept_map Range&lt;XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt;&gt; {
   typedef T* iterator;
   iterator begin(XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt; c) { return c.begin(); }
   iterator end(XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt; c) { return c.end(); }
};

template&lt;class T&gt;
concept_map Range&lt;const XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt;&gt; {
   typedef T* iterator;
   iterator begin(XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt; c) { return c.begin(); }
   iterator end(XYZCorpContainer&lt;T&gt; c) { return c.end(); }
};
</pre></blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-04-28 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I recommend NAD, although remain concerned about header organisation.
</p>
<p>
A user container will satisfy the <tt>MemberContainer</tt> concept, which IS auto.
There is a concept_map for all <tt>MemberContainers</tt> to <tt>Container</tt>, and then a
further concept_map for all <tt>Container</tt> to <tt>Range</tt>, so the stated problem is not
actually true.  User defined containers will automatically match the <tt>Range</tt>
concept without explicitly declaring a concept_map.
</p>
<p>
The problem is that they should now provide an additional two headers,
<tt>&lt;iterator_concepts&gt;</tt> and <tt>&lt;container_concepts&gt;</tt>.
 The only difference from
making <tt>Range</tt> an auto concept would be this reduces to a single header,
<tt>&lt;iterator_concepts&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p>
I am strongly in favour of any resolution that tackles the issue of
explicitly requiring concept headers to make these concept maps available.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We observe there is a recent paper by Bjarne that overlaps this issue.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair continues to recommend NAD.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open, and recommend the issue be deferred until after the next
Committee Draft is issued.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1106"></a>1106. Multiple exceptions from connected <tt>shared_future::get()</tt>?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas J. Gritzan <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#futures.shared_future">issues</a> in [futures.shared_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
It is not clear, if multiple threads are waiting in a 
<tt>shared_future::get()</tt> call, if each will rethrow the stored exception.
</p>
<p>
Paragraph 9 reads: 
</p>
<blockquote>
<i>Throws:</i> the stored exception, if an exception was stored and not 
retrieved before.
</blockquote>
<p>
The "not retrieved before" suggests that only one exception is thrown, 
but one exception for each call to <tt>get()</tt> is needed, and multiple calls 
to <tt>get()</tt> even on the same <tt>shared_future</tt> object seem to be allowed. 
</p>
<p>
I suggest removing "and not retrieved before" from the Throws paragraph. 
I recommend adding a note that explains that multiple calls on <tt>get()</tt> are 
allowed, and each call would result in an exception if an exception was 
stored. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We note there is a pending paper by Detlef
on such <tt>future</tt>-related issues;
we would like to wait for his paper before proceeding.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair suggests we may want language to clarify that this
<tt>get()</tt> function can be called from several threads
with no need for explicit locking.
</p>
<p>
Move to Open.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-23 Moved to Tentatively NAD Editorial after 5 positive votes on
c++std-lib.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Resolved by paper
<a href="file:///Users/hinnant/std%20documents/C++Mailings/papers/2009/n2997.htm">N2997</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>const R&amp; shared_future::get() const; 
R&amp; shared_future&lt;R&amp;&gt;::get() const; 
void shared_future&lt;void&gt;::get() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>...</p>
<p>
-9- <i>Throws:</i> the stored exception, if an exception was stored<del> and not retrieved before</del>.
<ins>
[<i>Note:</i> Multiple calls on <tt>get()</tt> are 
allowed, and each call would result in an exception if an exception was 
stored. � <i>end note</i>]
</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1107"></a>1107. constructor <tt>shared_future(unique_future)</tt> by value?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Thomas J. Gritzan <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#futures.shared_future">issues</a> in [futures.shared_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In the <tt>shared_future</tt> class definition in 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]
the move constructor 
that constructs a <tt>shared_future</tt> from an <tt>unique_future</tt> receives the 
parameter by value. In paragraph 3, the same constructor receives it as 
const value. 
</p>

<p>
I think that is a mistake and the constructor should take a r-value 
reference: 
</p>

<blockquote><pre>shared_future(unique_future&lt;R&gt;&amp;&amp; rhs);
</pre></blockquote>

<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>[
2009-07-05 Daniel notes:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposed change has already been incorported into the current working draft
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2914.pdf">N2914</a>.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>shared_future(unique_future&lt;R&gt;<ins>&amp;&amp;</ins> rhs);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change the definition of the constructor in 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>shared_future(<del>const</del> unique_future&lt;R&gt;<ins>&amp;&amp;</ins> rhs);
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1109"></a>1109. <tt>std::includes</tt> should require <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> predicate</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25.4.5.1 [includes] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-04-28 <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#includes">issues</a> in [includes].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
All the set operation algorithms require a <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> predicate, with
the exception of <tt>std::includes</tt>.  This looks like a typo as much as anything,
given the general library requirement that predicates are copy
constructible, and wording style of other set-like operations.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
Move to NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change  [algorithms.syn] and 25.4.5.1 [includes]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;InputIterator Iter1, InputIterator Iter2,
         <del>typename</del> <ins>CopyConstructible</ins> Compare&gt;
  requires Predicate&lt;Compare, Iter1::value_type, Iter2::value_type&gt;
        &amp;&amp; Predicate&lt;Compare, Iter2::value_type, Iter1::value_type&gt;
  bool includes(Iter1 first1, Iter1 last1,
                Iter2 first2, Iter2 last2,
                Compare comp);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1111"></a>1111. associative containers underconstrained</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.6 [associative] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#associative">issues</a> in [associative].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to table 87 (n2857) the expression <tt>X::key_equal</tt> for an unordered
container shall return a value of type <tt>Pred</tt>, where <tt>Pred</tt> is an equivalence
relation.
</p>

<p>
However, all 4 containers constrain <tt>Pred</tt> to be merely a <tt>Predicate</tt>,
and not <tt>EquivalenceRelation</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
We agree with the proposed resolution.
</p>
<p>
Move to Review.
</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
For ordered containers, replace 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>Predicate&lt;auto, Key, Key&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
with 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>StrictWeakOrder&lt;auto, Key, Key&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
For unordered containers, replace 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>Predicate&lt;auto, Key, Key&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
with 
</p>
<blockquote><pre>EquivalenceRelation&lt;auto, Key, Key&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
As in the following declarations:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Associative containers 23.6 [associative]
</p>
<p>
 1 Headers &lt;map&gt; and &lt;set&gt;:
</p>
<p>
   Header &lt;map&gt; synopsis
</p>
<blockquote><pre>   namespace std {
     template &lt;ValueType Key, ValueType T,
               <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
               Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
       requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
             &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class map;

     ...

     template &lt;ValueType Key, ValueType T,
               <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
               Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
       requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
             &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class multimap;

     ...

   }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
   Header &lt;set&gt; synopsis
</p>
<blockquote><pre>   namespace std {
     template &lt;ValueType Key, <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
               Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Key&gt; &gt;
       requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class set;

     ...

     template &lt;ValueType Key, <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
               Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Key&gt; &gt;
       requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
             &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class multiset;

     ...

   }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 23.4.1p2 Class template map [map]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Key, ValueType T,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class map {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>


<p>
 23.4.2p2 Class template multimap [multimap]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Key, ValueType T,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class multimap {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>


<p>
 23.4.3p2 Class template set [set]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Key, <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Key&gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class set {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>


<p>
 23.4.4p2 Class template multiset [multiset]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Key, <del>Predicate</del><ins>StrictWeakOrder</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Key&gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Compare&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, const Compare&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Compare, Compare&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class multiset {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 23.5 Unordered associative containers [unord]
</p>
<p>
 1 Headers &lt;unordered_map&gt; and &lt;unordered_set&gt;:
</p>
<p>
 Header &lt;unordered_map&gt; synopsis
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   // 23.5.1, class template unordered_map:
   template &lt;ValueType Key,
             ValueType T,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Key&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Key&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Pred = equal_to&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class unordered_map;

   // 23.5.2, class template unordered_multimap:
   template &lt;ValueType Key,
             ValueType T,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Key&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Key&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Pred = equal_to&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class unordered_multimap;

   ...
 }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 Header &lt;unordered_set&gt; synopsis
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   // 23.5.3, class template unordered_set:
   template &lt;ValueType Value,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Value&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Value&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Value<del>, Value</del>&gt; class Pred = equal_to&lt;Value&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Value&gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Value&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class unordered_set;

   // 23.5.4, class template unordered_multiset:
   template &lt;ValueType Value,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Value&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Value&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Value<del>, Value</del>&gt; class Pred = equal_to&lt;Value&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Value&gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Value&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
     class unordered_multiset;

   ...
 }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 23.5.1p3 Class template unordered_map [unord.map]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Key,
             ValueType T,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Key&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Key&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Pred = equal_to&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class unordered_map
   {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 23.5.2p3 Class template unordered_multimap [unord.multimap]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Key,
             ValueType T,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Key&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Key&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Key<del>, Key</del>&gt; Pred = equal_to&lt;Key&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;pair&amp;lt;&lt;b&gt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Key&gt; &amp;&amp; NothrowDestructible&lt;T&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class unordered_multimap
   {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 23.5.3p3 Class template unordered_set [unord.set]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Value,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Value&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Value&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Value<del>, Value</del>&gt; class Pred = equal_to&lt;Value&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Value&gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Value&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class unordered_set
   {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
 23.5.4p3 Class template unordered_multiset [unord.multiset]
</p>
<blockquote><pre> namespace std {
   template &lt;ValueType Value,
             Callable&lt;auto, const Value&amp;&gt; Hash = hash&lt;Value&gt;,
             <del>Predicate</del><ins>EquivalenceRelation</ins>&lt;auto, Value<del>, Value</del>&gt; class Pred = equal_to&lt;Value&gt;,
             Allocator Alloc = allocator&lt;Value&gt; &gt;
     requires NothrowDestructible&lt;Value&gt;
           &amp;&amp; SameType&lt;Hash::result_type, size_t&gt;
           &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Hash&gt; &amp;&amp; CopyConstructible&lt;Pred&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, const Pred&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Pred, Pred&amp;&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, const Hash&amp;&gt;
           &amp;&amp; AllocatableElement&lt;Alloc, Hash, Hash&amp;&amp;&gt;
   class unordered_multiset
   {
     ...
   };
 }
</pre></blockquote>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1112"></a>1112. bitsets and new style for loop</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-06 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>Std::bitset</tt> is a homogeneous container-like sequence of bits, yet it does
not model the Range concept so cannot be used with the new for-loop syntax.
It is the only such type in the library that does NOT support the new for
loop.
</p>
<p>
The obvious reason is that bitset does not support iterators.
</p>
<p>
At least two reasonable solutions are available:
</p>
<ol type="i">
<li>
Add an iterator interface to <tt>bitset</tt>, bringing its interface close to that
of <tt>std::array</tt>
</li>
<li>
Provide an unspecified concept_map for <tt>Range&lt;bitset&gt;</tt>.
</li>
</ol>
<p>
The latter will still need some kind of iterator-like adapter for <tt>bitset</tt>,
but gives implementers greater freedom on the details. E.g. begin/end return
some type that simply invokes <tt>operator[]</tt> on the object it wraps, and
increments its index on <tt>operator++</tt>.  A vendor can settle for <tt>InputIterator</tt>
support, rather than wrapping up a full <tt>RandomAccessIterator</tt>.
</p>
<p>
I have a mild preference for option (ii) as I think it is less work to
specify at this stage of the process, although (i) is probably more useful
in the long run.
</p>
<p>
Hmm, my wording looks a little woolly, as it does not say what the element
type of the range is.  Do I get a range of <tt>bool</tt>, <tt>bitset&lt;N&gt;::reference</tt>, or
something else entirely?
</p>
<p>
I guess most users will assume the behaviour of reference, but expect to
work with <tt>bool</tt>.  <tt>Bool</tt> is OK for read-only traversal, but you really need to
take a reference to a <tt>bitset::reference</tt> if you want to write back.
</p>

<p><i>[
Batavia (2009-05):
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Move to Open.
We further recommend this be deferred until after the next Committee Draft.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-05-25 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I just stumbled over the <tt>Range concept_map</tt> for <tt>valarray</tt> and this should
probably set the precedent on how to write the wording.
</p>

<p><i>[
Howard: I've replaced the proposed wording with Alisdair's suggestion.
]</i></p>


</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-24 Daniel modifies the proposed wording for non-concepts.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as Tentatively NAD Future due to the loss of concepts.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
All concepts-related text has been removed from the draft.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Modify the section 20.5 [template.bitset] <tt>&lt;bitset&gt;</tt> synopsis by adding
the following at the end of the synopsis:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>
// XX.X.X bitset range access [bitset.range]
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-1</i> begin(bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-2</i> begin(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-1</i> end(bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-2</i> end(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Add a new section <ins>"bitset range access" [bitset.range]</ins>
after the current section 20.5.4 [bitset.operators] with the following series of
paragraphs:
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
<ins>
1.  In the <tt>begin</tt> and <tt>end</tt> function templates that follow, <i>unspecified-1</i>
is a type that meets the requirements of a mutable random access
iterator (24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]) whose <tt>value_type</tt> is <tt>bool</tt> and
whose reference type is <tt>bitset&lt;N&gt;::reference</tt>.
<i>unspecified-2</i> is a type that meets the requirements of a constant
random access iterator (24.2.7 [random.access.iterators]) whose <tt>value_type</tt>
is <tt>bool</tt> and whose reference type is <tt>bool</tt>.
</ins>
</p>
<pre><ins>
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-1</i> begin(bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-2</i> begin(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
</ins>
</pre>
<blockquote>
<ins>2.  Returns: an iterator referencing the first bit in the bitset.</ins>
</blockquote>

<pre><ins>
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-1</i> end(bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;size_t N&gt; <i>unspecified-2</i> end(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp;);
</ins></pre>

<blockquote>
<ins>3.  Returns: an iterator referencing one past the last bit in the
bitset.</ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>












<hr>
<h3><a name="1115"></a>1115. <tt>va_copy</tt> missing from Standard macros table</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> C.2 [diff.library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Miles Zhao <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-23 <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#diff.library">issues</a> in [diff.library].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In "Table 122 -- Standard macros" of C.2 [diff.library], which lists the 56 macros
inherited from C library, <tt>va_copy</tt> seems to be missing. But in
"Table 21 -- Header <tt>&lt;cstdarg&gt;</tt> synopsis" (18.10 [support.runtime]), there is.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as Tentatively NAD Editorial, if Pete disagrees, Howard
will move to Tentatively Ready
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add <tt>va_copy</tt> to Table 122 -- Standard macros in C.2 [diff.library].
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1119"></a>1119. tuple query APIs do not support references</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-23 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>tuple</tt> query APIs <tt>tuple_size</tt> and
<tt>tuple_element</tt> do not support references-to-tuples.  This can be
annoying when a template deduced a parameter type to be a reference,
which must be explicitly stripped with <tt>remove_reference</tt> before calling
these APIs.
</p>
<p>
I am not proposing a resolution at this point, as there is a
combinatorial explosion with lvalue/rvalue references and
cv-qualification (see previous issue) that suggests some higher
refactoring is in order.  This might be something to kick back over to
Core/Evolution.
</p>
<p>
Note that we have the same problem in numeric_limits.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Open. Alisdair to provide wording.
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD.  This is an extension after the FCD, without a clear motivation.  May consider as NAD Future if motivating examples come forward.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1120"></a>1120. New type trait - remove_all</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-23 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Sometimes it is necessary to remove all qualifiers from a type before
passing on to a further API.  A good example would be calling the
<tt>tuple</tt> query APIs <tt>tuple_size</tt> or <tt>tuple_element</tt>
with a deduced type inside a function template.  If the deduced type is
cv-qualified or a reference then the call will fail.  The solution is to
chain calls to
<tt>remove_cv&lt;remove_reference&lt;T&gt;::type&gt;::type</tt>, and
note that the order matters.
</p>
<p>
Suggest it would be helpful to add a new type trait,
<tt>remove_all</tt>, that removes all top-level qualifiers from a type
i.e. cv-qualification and any references.  Define the term in such a way
that if additional qualifiers are added to the language, then
<tt>remove_all</tt> is defined as stripping those as well.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<tt>remove_all</tt> seems too generic, a possible alternative matching
the current naming style could be <tt>remove_cv_reference</tt> or
<tt>remove_reference_cv</tt>. It should also be considered whether this
trait should also remove 'extents', or pointer 'decorations'. Especially
if the latter situations are considered as well, it might be easier to
chose the name not in terms of what it <em>removes</em> (which might be
a lot), but in terms of it <em>creates</em>. In this case I could think
of e.g. <tt>extract_value_type</tt>.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1121"></a>1121. Support for multiple arguments</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-25 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Both add and multiply could sensibly be called with more than two arguments.
The variadic template facility makes such declarations simple, and is likely
to be frequently wrapped by end users if we do not supply the variant
ourselves.
</p>
<p>
We deliberately ignore divide at this point as it is not transitive.
Likewise, subtract places special meaning on the first argument so I do not
suggest extending that immediately.  Both could be supported with analogous
wording to that for add/multiply below.
</p>
<p>
Note that the proposed resolution is potentially incompatible with that
proposed for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a>, although the addition of the typedef to ratio would be
equally useful.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10-30 Alisdair adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
The consensus of the group when we reviewed this in Santa Cruz was that
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#921">921</a> would proceed to Ready as planned, and the
multi-paramater add/multiply templates should be renamed as
<tt>ratio_sum</tt> and <tt>ratio_product</tt> to avoid the problem
mixing template aliases with partial specializations.
</p>

<p>
It was also suggested to close this issue as NAD Future as it does not
correspond directly to any NB comment.  NBs are free to submit a
specific comment (and re-open) in CD2 though.
</p>

<p>
Walter Brown also had concerns on better directing the order of
evaluation to avoid overflows if we do proceed for 0x rather than TR1,
so wording may not be complete yet.
</p>

<p><i>[
Alisdair updates wording.
]</i></p>


</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-30 Howard:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD Future after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Does not have sufficient support at this time. May wish to reconsider for a
future standard.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Add the following type traits to p3 20.6 [ratio]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// ratio arithmetic
template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_add;
template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_subtract;
template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_multiply;
template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_divide;
<ins>template &lt;class R1, class ... RList&gt; struct ratio_sum;</ins>
<ins>template &lt;class R1, class ... RList&gt; struct ratio_product;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
after 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] p1: add
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class R1, class ... RList&gt; struct ratio_sum; // declared, never defined

template &lt;class R1&gt; struct ratio_sum&lt;R1&gt; : R1 {};
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>R1</tt> is a specialization of class template <tt>ratio</tt>
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class R1, class R2, class ... RList&gt; 
 struct ratio_sum&lt;R1, R2, RList...&gt;
   : ratio_add&lt; R1, ratio_sum&lt;R2, RList...&gt;&gt; {
};
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>R1</tt> and each element in parmater pack
<tt>RList</tt> is a specialization of class template <tt>ratio</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
after 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] p3: add
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class R1, class ... RList&gt; struct ratio_product; // declared, never defined

template &lt;class R1&gt; struct ratio_product&lt;R1&gt; : R1 {};
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>R1</tt> is a specialization of class template <tt>ratio</tt>
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class R1, class R2, class ... RList&gt; 
 struct ratio_sum&lt;R1, R2, RList...&gt;
   : ratio_add&lt; R1, ratio_product&lt;R2, RList...&gt;&gt; {
};
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>R1</tt> and each element in parmater pack
<tt>RList</tt> is a specialization of class template <tt>ratio</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>








<hr>
<h3><a name="1124"></a>1124.  Invalid definition of concept RvalueOf</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [concept.transform] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#concept.transform">issues</a> in [concept.transform].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
A recent news group
<a href="http://groups.google.de/group/comp.std.c++/browse_frm/thread/8eb92768a19fb46f">article</a>
points to several defects in the
specification of reference-related concepts.
</p>
<p>
One problem of the concept <tt>RvalueOf</tt> as currently defined in
X [concept.transform]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept RvalueOf&lt;typename T&gt; {
 typename type = T&amp;&amp;;
 requires ExplicitlyConvertible&lt;T&amp;,type&gt; &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;T&amp;&amp;,type&gt;;
}

template&lt;typename T&gt; concept_map RvalueOf&lt;T&amp;&gt; {
 typedef T&amp;&amp; type;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
is that if <tt>T</tt> is an lvalue-reference, the requirement
<tt>Convertible&lt;T&amp;&amp;,type&gt;</tt> isn't satisfied for
lvalue-references, because after reference-collapsing in the concept
definition we have <tt>Convertible&lt;T&amp;,type&gt;</tt> in this case,
which isn't satisfied in the concept map template and also is not the
right constraint either. I think that the reporter is right that
<tt>SameType</tt> requirements should do the job and that we also should
use the new <tt>RvalueReference</tt> concept to specify a best matching
type requirement.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In X [concept.transform] before p. 4 change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>auto concept RvalueOf&lt;typename T&gt; {
  <del>typename</del><ins>RvalueReference</ins> type = T&amp;&amp;;
  requires <del>ExplicitlyConvertible&lt;T&amp;, type&gt; &amp;&amp; Convertible&lt;T&amp;&amp;, type&gt;</del><ins>SameType&lt;T&amp;, type&amp;&gt;</ins>;
}
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1125"></a>1125. ostream_iterator does not work with movable types</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.2.2 [ostream.iterator.ops] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-28 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>ostream_iterator</tt> has not been updated to support moveable types, in a
similar manner to the insert iterators.
Note that this is not a problem for <tt>ostreambuf_iterator</tt>, as the types it is
restricted to dealing with do not support extra-efficient moving.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-10 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.  Rationale
added below.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add second <tt>operator=</tt> overload to class <tt>template ostream_iterator</tt>
in 24.6.2 [ostream.iterator], para 2:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>ostream_iterator&lt;T,charT,traits&gt;&amp; operator=(const T&amp; value);
<ins>ostream_iterator&lt;T,charT,traits&gt;&amp; operator=(T&amp;&amp; value);</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add a new paragraph: in 24.6.2.2 [ostream.iterator.ops]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>ostream_iterator&amp; operator=(T&amp;&amp; value);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
-2- <i>Effects:</i>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>*out_stream &lt;&lt; std::move(value);
if(delim != 0)
  *out_stream &lt;&lt; delim;
return (*this);
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Several objections to move forward with this issue were voiced in the thread
starting with c++std-lib-25438.  Among them is that we know of no motivating
use case to make streaming rvalues behave differently than streaming const
lvalues.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1127"></a>1127. rvalue references and iterator traits</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The deprecated support for <tt>iterator_traits</tt> and legacy (unconstrained)
iterators features the (exposition only) concept:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept IsReference&lt;typename T&gt; { } // exposition only
template&lt;typename T&gt; concept_map IsReference&lt;T&amp;&gt; { }
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Now this looks exactly like the <tt>LvalueReference</tt> concept recently added to
clause 20, so I wonder if we should use that instead?
Then I consider the lack of rvalue-reference support, which means that
<tt>move_iterator</tt> would always flag as merely supporting the <tt>input_iterator_tag</tt>
category.  This suggests we retain the exposition concept, but add a second
concept_map to support rvalue references.
</p>
<p>
I would suggest adding the extra concept_map is the right way forward, but
still wonder if the two exposition-only concepts in this clause might be
worth promoting to clause 20.  That question might better be answered with a
fuller investigation of type_trait/concept unification though.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In Iterator traits 24.4.1 [iterator.traits] para 4 add:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>concept IsReference&lt;typename T&gt; { } // exposition only
template&lt;typename T&gt; concept_map IsReference&lt;T&amp;&gt; { }
<ins>template&lt;typename T&gt; concept_map IsReference&lt;T&amp;&amp;&gt; { }</ins>
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1128"></a>1128. Missing definition of <tt>iterator_traits&lt;T*&gt;</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [iterator.syn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-28 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>&lt;iterator&gt;</tt> header synopsis declares a partial specialization of
<tt>iterator_traits</tt> to support pointers, X [iterator.syn].  The implication
is that specialization will be described in D10, yet it did not follow the
rest of the deprecated material into this clause.
</p>
<p>
However, this is not as bad as it first seems!
There are partial specializations of <tt>iterator_traits</tt> for types that satisfy
the various Iterator concepts, and there are concept_maps for pointers to
explicitly support the <tt>RandomAccessIterator</tt> concept, so the required
template will be present - just not in the manner advertised.
</p>
<p>
I can see two obvious solutions:
</p>

<ol type="i">
<li>
Restore the <tt>iterator_traits&lt;T*&gt;</tt> partial specialization in D.10
</li>
<li>
Remove the declaration of <tt>iterator_traits&lt;T*&gt;</tt> from 24.3 synopsis
</li>
</ol>
<p>
I recommend option (ii) in the wording below
</p>
<p>
Option (ii) could be extended to strike all the declarations of deprecated
material from the synopsis, as it is effectively duplicating D.10 anyway.
This is the approach taken for deprecated library components in the 98/03
standards.  This is probably a matter best left to the Editor though.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In X [iterator.syn] strike:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>template&lt;class T&gt; struct iterator_traits&lt;T*&gt;;</del>
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1129"></a>1129. <tt>istream(buf)_iterator</tt> should support literal sentinel value</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons], 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-05-30 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>istream_iterator</tt> and <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> should support literal sentinel
values.  The default constructor is frequently used to terminate ranges, and
could easily be a literal value for <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt>, and
<tt>istream_iterator</tt> when iterating value types.  A little more work using a
suitably sized/aligned char-array for storage (or an updated component like
<tt>boost::optional</tt> proposed for TR2) would allow <tt>istream_iterator</tt> to support
<tt>constexpr</tt> default constructor in all cases, although we might leave this
tweak as a QoI issue.  Note that requiring <tt>constexpr</tt> be supported also
allows us to place no-throw guarantees on this constructor too.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-06-02 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I agree with the usefulness of the issue suggestion, but we need
to ensure that <tt>istream_iterator</tt> <em>can</em> satisfy be literal if needed.
Currently this is not clear, because 24.6.1 [istream.iterator]/3 declares
a copy constructor and a destructor and explains their semantic in
24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons]/3+4.
</p>
<p>
The prototype semantic specification is ok (although it seems
somewhat redundant to me, because the semantic doesn't say
anything interesting in both cases), but for support of trivial class
types we also need a trivial copy constructor and destructor as of
9 [class]/6. The current non-informative specification of these
two special members suggests to remove their explicit declaration
in the class and add explicit wording that says that if <tt>T</tt> is
trivial a default constructed iterator is also literal, alternatively it
would be possible to mark both as defaulted and add explicit
(memberwise) wording that guarantees that they are trivial.
</p>
<p>
Btw.: I'm quite sure that the <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> additions to
ensure triviality are not sufficient as suggested, because the
library does not yet give general guarantees that a defaulted
special member declaration makes this member also trivial.
Note that e.g. the atomic types do give a general statement!
</p>
<p>
Finally there is a wording issue: There does not exist something
like a "literal constructor". The core language uses the term
"constexpr constructor" for this.
</p>
<p>
Suggestion:
</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.6.1 [istream.iterator]/3 as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> istream_iterator();
istream_iterator(istream_type&amp; s);
istream_iterator(const istream_iterator<del>&lt;T,charT,traits,Distance&gt;</del>&amp; x)<ins> = default</ins>;
~istream_iterator()<ins> = default</ins>;
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons]/1 as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> istream_iterator();
</pre>
<blockquote>
-1- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs the end-of-stream iterator. <ins>If <tt>T</tt> is a literal type,
then this constructor shall be a constexpr constructor.</ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons]/3 as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>istream_iterator(const istream_iterator<del>&lt;T,charT,traits,Distance&gt;</del>&amp; x)<ins> = default</ins>;
</pre>
<blockquote>
-3- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs a copy of <tt>x</tt>. <ins>If <tt>T</tt> is a literal type, then
this constructor shall be a trivial copy constructor.</ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons]/4 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>~istream_iterator()<ins> = default</ins>;
</pre>
<blockquote>
-4- <i>Effects:</i> The iterator is destroyed. <ins>If <tt>T</tt> is a literal type, then
this destructor shall be a trivial
destructor.</ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator] before p. 1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> istreambuf_iterator() throw();
<ins>istreambuf_iterator(const istreambuf_iterator&amp;)  throw() = default;</ins>
<ins>~istreambuf_iterator()  throw() = default;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Change 24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator]/1 as indicated:
</p>
<blockquote>
[..] 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. <ins>All
specializations of <tt>istreambuf_iterator</tt> shall have a trivial copy
constructor, a constexpr default
constructor and a trivial destructor.</ins>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  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>
24.6.1 [istream.iterator] para 3
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> istream_iterator();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
24.6.1.1 [istream.iterator.cons]
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> istream_iterator();
</pre>
<blockquote>
-1- <i>Effects:</i> Constructs the end-of-stream iterator.
<ins>If <tt>T</tt> is a literal type, then this constructor shall
be a literal constructor.</ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
24.6.3 [istreambuf.iterator]
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>constexpr</ins> istreambuf_iterator() throw();
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1132"></a>1132. JP-30: nested exceptions</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Seiji Hayashida <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP 30</b></p>

<p>
C++0x <tt>nested_exception</tt> cannot handle a structured exception well. The
following codes show two types of tree structured exception handling.
</p>
<p>
The first one is based on <tt>nested_exception</tt> in C++0x,
while the second one is based on my library <tt>trickerr.h</tt> (in Japanese).
<a href="http://tricklib.com/cxx/dagger/trickerr.h">http://tricklib.com/cxx/dagger/trickerr.h</a>
</p>
<p>
Assume that Function <tt>A()</tt> calls two sub functions <tt>A_a()</tt> and <tt>A_b()</tt>, both might
throw tree structured exceptions, and <tt>A_b()</tt> must be called even if <tt>A_a()</tt>
throws an exception.
</p>
<p>
List A (code of tree structured exception handling based on nested_exception
in C++0x)
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void A()
{
    try
    {
        std::vector&lt;exception_ptr&gt; exception_list;
        try
        {
            // A_a() does a similar processing as A().
            A_a();
        }
        catch(...)
        {
            exception_list.push_back(current_exception());
        }

        // ***The processing A() has to do even when A_a() fails. ***
        try
        {
            // A_b() does a similar processing as A().
            A_b();
        }
        catch(...)
        {
            exception_list.push_back(current_exception());
        }
        if (!exception_list.empty())
        {
            throw exception_list;
        }
    }
    catch(...)
    {
        throw_with_nested(A_exception("someone error"));
    }
}
void print_tree_exception(exception_ptr e, const std::string &amp; indent ="")
{
    const char * indent_unit = " ";
    const char * mark = "- ";
    try
    {
        rethow_exception(e);
    }
    catch(const std::vector&lt;exception_ptr&gt; e)
    {
        for(std::vector&lt;exception_ptr&gt;::const_iterator i = e.begin(); i!=e.end(); ++i)
        {
            print_tree_exception(i, indent);
        }
    }
    catch(const std::nested_exception  e)
    {
        print_tree_exception(evil_i(e), indent +indent_unit);
    }
    catch(const std::exception e)
    {
        std::cout &lt;&lt; indent &lt;&lt; mark &lt;&lt; e.what() &lt;&lt; std::endl;
    }
    catch(...)
    {
        std::cout &lt;&lt; indent &lt;&lt; mark &lt;&lt; "unknown exception" &lt;&lt; std::endl;
    }
}
int main(int, char * [])
{
    try
    {
        A();
    }
    catch()
    {
        print_tree_exception(current_exception());
    }
    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
List B ( code of tree structured exception handling based on <tt>trickerr.h</tt>. )
"trickerr.h" (in Japanese), refer to:
<a href="http://tricklib.com/cxx/dagger/trickerr.h">http://tricklib.com/cxx/dagger/trickerr.h</a>.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void A()
{
    tricklib::error_listener_type error_listener;
    // A_a() is like A(). A_a() can throw tree structured exception.
    A_a();

    // *** It must do process so that A_a() throws exception in A(). ***
    // A_b() is like A(). A_b() can throw tree structured exception.
    A_b();

    if (error_listener.has_error()) // You can write this "if block" in destructor
                                    //  of class derived from error_listener_type.
    {
        throw_error(new A_error("someone error",error_listener.listener_off().extract_pending_error()));
    }
}
void print_tree_error(const tricklib::error_type &amp;a_error, const std::string &amp; indent = "")
{
    const char * indent_unit = " ";
    const char * mark = "- ";

    tricklib::error_type error = a_error;
    while(error)
    {
        std::cout &lt;&lt; indent &lt;&lt; mark &lt;&lt; error-&gt;message &lt;&lt; std::endl;
        if (error-&gt;children)
        {
            print_tree_error(error-&gt;children, indent +indent_unit);
        }
        error = error-&gt;next;
    }
}
int main(int, char * [])
{
    tricklib::error_thread_power error_thread_power_on; // This object is necessary per thread.

    try
    {
        A();
    }
    catch(error_type error)
    {
        print_tree_error(error);
    }
    catch(...)
    {
        std::cout &lt;&lt; "- unknown exception" &lt;&lt; std::endl;
    }
    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Prospect
</p>
<p>
We will focus on the method A() since the other methods, also main(), occur
only once respectively.
</p>

<ul>
<li>
 In the List A above (of the nested exception handling), it is hard to
 find out an active reason to use the nested exception handling at this
 scene. Rather, we can take a simpler description by throwing the entire
 exception_list directly to the top level.
</li>
<li>
 The code in the same example gives us a kind of redundant impression,
 which might have come from the fact that the try-throw-catch framework does
 not assume a tree structured exception handling.
</li>
</ul>

<p>
According to the above observation, we cannot help concluding that it is not
so easy to use the nested_exception handling as a tree structured exception
handling mechanism in a practical sense.
</p>
<p>
This text is based on the web page below (in Japanese).
<a href="http://d.hatena.ne.jp/wraith13/20081231/1230715424">http://d.hatena.ne.jp/wraith13/20081231/1230715424</a>
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD. The committee agrees that nested_exception is not a good
match for this usage model. The committee did not see a way of improving
this within the timeframe allowed.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1139"></a>1139. Thread support library not concept enabled</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30 [thread] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-15 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 93, JP 79, UK 333, JP 81</b></p>

<p>
The thread chapter is not concept enabled.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1140"></a>1140. Numerics library not concept enabled</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26 [numerics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-15 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 84</b></p>

<p>
The numerics chapter is not concept enabled.
</p>

<p>
The portion of this comment dealing with random numbers was resolved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2836.pdf">N2836</a>,
which was accepted in Summit.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1141"></a>1141. Input/Output library not concept enabled</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-15 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 85, JP 67, JP 68, JP 69, JP 72, UK 308</b></p>

<p>
The input/output chapter is not concept enabled.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1142"></a>1142. Regular expressions library not concept enabled</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28 [re] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-15 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 86, UK 309, UK 310</b></p>

<p>
The regular expressions chapter is not concept enabled.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1143"></a>1143. Atomic operations library not concept enabled</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29 [atomics] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-15 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 87, UK 311</b></p>

<p>
The atomics chapter is not concept enabled.
</p>

<p>
Needs to also consider issues <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#923">923</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#924">924</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1145"></a>1145. inappropriate headers 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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-16 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 312</b></p>

<p>
The contents of the <tt>&lt;stdatomic.h&gt;</tt> header are not listed anywhere,
and <tt>&lt;cstdatomic&gt;</tt> is listed as a C99 header in chapter 17.
If we intend to use these for compatibility with a future C standard,
we should not use them now.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Remove <tt>&lt;cstdatomic&gt;</tt> from the C99 headers in table 14.
Add a new header <tt>&lt;atomic&gt;</tt> to the headers in table 13.
Update chapter 29 to remove reference to <tt>&lt;stdatomic.h&gt;</tt>
and replace the use of <tt>&lt;cstdatomic&gt;</tt> with <tt>&lt;atomic&gt;</tt>.
</p>
<p><i>[
If and when WG14 adds atomic operations to C
we can add corresponding headers to table 14 with a TR.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1146"></a>1146. "lockfree" does not say enough</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 29.4 [atomics.lockfree] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yasskin <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#atomics.lockfree">issues</a> in [atomics.lockfree].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 88</b></p>

<p>
The "lockfree" facilities do not tell the programmer enough.
</p>

<p>
There are 2 problems here.
First, at least on x86,
it's less important to me whether some integral types are lock free
than what is the largest type I can pass to atomic and have it be lock-free.
For example, if <tt>long long</tt>s are not lock-free,
<tt>ATOMIC_INTEGRAL_LOCK_FREE</tt> is probably 1,
but I'd still be interested in knowing whether longs are always lock-free.
Or if long longs at any address are lock-free,
I'd expect <tt>ATOMIC_INTEGRAL_LOCK_FREE</tt> to be 2,
but I may actually care whether I have access to
the <code>cmpxchg16b</code> instruction.
None of the support here helps with that question.
(There are really 2 related questions here:
what alignment requirements are there for lock-free access;
and what processor is the program actually running on,
as opposed to what it was compiled for?)
</p>

<p>
Second, having <tt>atomic_is_lock_free</tt> only apply to individual objects
is pretty useless
(except, as Lawrence Crowl points out,
for throwing an exception when an object is unexpectedly not lock-free).
I'm likely to want to use its result to decide what algorithm to use,
and that algorithm is probably going to allocate new memory
containing atomic objects and then try to act on them.
If I can't predict the lock-freedom of the new object
by checking the lock-freedom of an existing object,
I may discover after starting the algorithm that I can't continue.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-06-16 Jeffrey Yasskin adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
To solve the first problem, I think 2 macros would help:
<tt>MAX_POSSIBLE_LOCK_FREE_SIZE</tt> and <tt>MAX_GUARANTEED_LOCK_FREE_SIZE</tt>,
which expand to the maximum value of <tt>sizeof(T)</tt> for which atomic may
(or will, respectively) use lock-free operations.
Lawrence points out that this
"relies heavily on implementations
using word-size compare-swap on sub-word-size types,
which in turn requires address modulation."
He expects that to be the end state anyway, so it doesn't bother him much.
</p>

<p>
To solve the second,
I think one could specify that equally aligned objects of the same type
will return the same value from <tt>atomic_is_lock_free()</tt>.
I don't know how to specify "equal alignment".
Lawrence suggests an additional function, <tt>atomic_is_always_lock_free()</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-22 Benjamin Kosnik:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
In the evolution discussion of N2925, "More Collected Issues with
Atomics," there is an action item with respect to
LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1146">1146</a>, US 88
</p>

<p>
This is stated in the paper as:
</p>
<p>
Relatedly, Mike Sperts will create an issue to propose adding a traits
mechanism to check the compile-time properties through a template
mechanism rather than macros
</p>

<p>
Here is my attempt to do this. I don't believe that a separate trait is
necessary for this, and that instead <tt>atomic_integral::is_lock_free</tt> can
be re-purposed with minimal work as follows.
</p>

<p><i>[
Howard: Put Benjamin's wording in the proposed wording section.
]</i></p>


</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-22 Alberto Ganesh Barbati:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Just a thought... wouldn't it be better to use a scoped enum instead of
plain integers? For example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>enum class is_lock_free
{
    never = 0, sometimes = 1, always = 2;
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
if compatibility with C is deemed important, we could use an unscoped
enum with suitably chosen names.  It would still be more descriptive
than 0, 1 and 2.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Header <tt>&lt;cstdatomic&gt;</tt> synopsis  [atomics.synopsis]
</p>

<p>
Edit  as follows:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
...
// 29.4, lock-free property
<del>#define ATOMIC_INTEGRAL_LOCK_FREE unspecified</del>
<ins>#define ATOMIC_CHAR_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_CHAR16_T_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_CHAR32_T_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_WCHAR_T_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_SHORT_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_LONG_LOCK_FREE unspecified
#define ATOMIC_LLONG_LOCK_FREE unspecified</ins>
#define ATOMIC_ADDRESS_LOCK_FREE unspecified
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Lock-free Property 29.4 [atomics.lockfree]
</p>

<p>
Edit the synopsis as follows.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
   <del>#define ATOMIC_INTEGRAL_LOCK_FREE unspecified</del>
   <ins>#define ATOMIC_CHAR_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_CHAR16_T_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_CHAR32_T_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_WCHAR_T_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_SHORT_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_LONG_LOCK_FREE unspecified
   #define ATOMIC_LLONG_LOCK_FREE unspecified</ins>
   #define ATOMIC_ADDRESS_LOCK_FREE unspecified
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Edit paragraph 1 as follows.
</p>

<blockquote>
The <ins>ATOMIC_...._LOCK_FREE</ins> macros <del>ATOMIC_INTEGRAL_LOCK_FREE and ATOMIC_ADDRESS_LOCK_FREE</del> indicate the general lock-free
property of <del>integral and address atomic</del> <ins>the corresponding atomic integral</ins> types<ins>, with the
signed and unsigned variants grouped together</ins>.
<del>The properties also apply to the corresponding specializations of the atomic template.</del>
A value of 0
indicates that the types are never lock-free. A value of 1
indicates that the types are sometimes lock-free. A value of 2
indicates that the types are always lock-free.
</blockquote>

<p>
Operations on Atomic Types 29.6 [atomics.types.operations]
</p>

<p>
Edit as follows.
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>void</del> <ins>static constexpr bool</ins> A::is_lock_free() const volatile;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> True if the <del>object's</del> <ins>types's</ins> operations are lock-free, false
otherwise.
<ins>
[<i>Note:</i> In the same way that <tt>&lt;limits&gt;</tt>
<tt>std::numeric_limits&lt;short&gt;::max()</tt> is related to
<tt>&lt;limits.h&gt;</tt> <tt>__LONG_LONG_MAX__</tt>, <tt>&lt;atomic&gt;
std::atomic_short::is_lock_free</tt> is related to
<tt>&lt;stdatomic.h&gt;</tt> and <tt>ATOMIC_SHORT_LOCK_FREE</tt> �
<i>end note</i>]
</ins>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1147"></a>1147. non-volatile atomic functions</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yasskin <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-16 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 90</b></p>

<p>
The C++0X draft
declares all of the functions dealing with atomics (section 29.6 [atomics.types.operations])
to take volatile arguments.
Yet it also says (29.4-3),
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
[ Note: Many operations are volatile-qualified.
The "volatile as device register" semantics have not changed in the standard.
This qualification means that volatility is preserved
when applying these operations to volatile objects.
It does not mean that operations on non-volatile objects become volatile.
Thus, volatile qualified operations on non-volatile objects
may be merged under some conditions. �end note ]
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
I was thinking about how to implement this in gcc,
and I believe that we'll want to overload most of the functions
on volatile and non-volatile.
Here's why:
</p>

<p>
To let the compiler take advantage of the permission
to merge non-volatile atomic operations and reorder atomics in certain,
we'll need to tell the compiler backend
about exactly which atomic operation was used.
So I expect most of the functions of the form atomic_&lt;op&gt;_explicit()
(e.g. atomic_load_explicit, atomic_exchange_explicit,
atomic_fetch_add_explicit, etc.)
to become compiler builtins.
A builtin can tell whether its argument was volatile or not,
so those functions don't really need extra explicit overloads.
However, I don't expect that we'll want to add builtins
for every function in chapter 29,
since most can be implemented in terms of the _explicit free functions:
</p>

<pre><code>class atomic_int {
  __atomic_int_storage value;
 public:
  int fetch_add(int increment, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile {
    // &amp;value has type "volatile __atomic_int_storage*".
    atomic_fetch_add_explicit(&amp;value, increment, order);
  }
  ...
};
</code></pre>

<p>
But now this <em>always</em> calls
the volatile builtin version of atomic_fetch_add_explicit(),
even if the atomic_int wasn't declared volatile.
To preserve volatility and the compiler's permission to optimize,
I'd need to write:
</p>

<pre><code>class atomic_int {
  __atomic_int_storage value;
 public:
  int fetch_add(int increment, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile {
    atomic_fetch_add_explicit(&amp;value, increment, order);
  }
  int fetch_add(int increment, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) {
    atomic_fetch_add_explicit(&amp;value, increment, order);
  }
  ...
};
</code></pre>

<p>
But this is visibly different from the declarations in the standard
because it's now overloaded.
(Consider passing &amp;atomic_int::fetch_add as a template parameter.)
</p>

<p>
The implementation may already have permission to add overloads
to the member functions:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
17.6.4.5 [member.functions] An implementation may declare additional non-virtual
member function signatures within a class:<br>
...
</p>
<ul>
<li>by adding a member function signature for a member function name.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>

<p>
but I don't see an equivalent permission to add overloads to the free functions.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-06-16 Lawrence adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I recommend allowing non-volatile overloads.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2992.html">N2992</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1148"></a>1148. Wrong argument type of I/O stream manipulators <tt>setprecision()</tt>
and <tt>setw()</tt></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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Marc Steinbach <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-20 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The header <tt>&lt;iomanip&gt;</tt> synopsis in 27.7 [iostream.format] specifies
</p>
<blockquote><pre>T5 setprecision(int n);
T6 setw(int n);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The argument types should be streamsize, as in class <tt>ios_base</tt>
(see 27.5.2 [ios.base]):
</p>
<blockquote><pre>streamsize precision() const;
streamsize precision(streamsize prec);
streamsize width() const;
streamsize width(streamsize wide);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
(Editorial: 'wide' should probably be renamed as 'width', or maybe just 'w'.)
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07-29 Daniel clarified wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
No concensus for this change.  There was some interest in doing the opposite
fix:  Change the <tt>streamsize</tt> in <tt>&lt;ios&gt;</tt> to <tt>int</tt>.
But ultimately there was no concensus for that change either.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In 27.7 [iostream.format], header <tt>&lt;iomanip&gt;</tt> synopsis change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>T5 setprecision(<del>int</del><ins>streamsize</ins> n);
T6 setw(<del>int</del><ins>streamsize</ins> n);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
In 27.7.3 [std.manip], just before p. 6 change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>unspecified setprecision(<del>int</del><ins>streamsize</ins> n);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
In 27.7.3 [std.manip], just before p. 7 change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>unspecified setw(<del>int</del><ins>streamsize</ins> n);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>








<hr>
<h3><a name="1149"></a>1149. Reformulating NonemptyRange axiom</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [rand.concept.urng] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Walter Brown <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-25 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In X [rand.concept.urng], we have the following:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>concept UniformRandomNumberGenerator&lt;typename G&gt; : Callable&lt;G&gt; {
  ...
  axiom NonemptyRange(G&amp; g) {
    G::min() &lt; G::max();
  }
  ...
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Since the parameter <tt>G</tt> is in scope throughout the concept, there is no
need for the axiom to be further parameterized, and so the axiom can be
slightly simplified as:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>axiom NonemptyRange()  {
  G::min() &lt; G::max();
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
We can further reformulate so as to avoid any axiom machinery as:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>requires True&lt; G::min() &lt; G::max() &gt;;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This is not only a simpler statement of the same requirement, but also
forces the requirement to be checked.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post-Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In X [rand.concept.urng], replace the <tt>NonemptyRange</tt> axiom by:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>axiom NonemptyRange(G&amp; g) { 
   G::min() &lt; G::max(); 
}</del>
<ins>requires True&lt; G::min() &lt; G::max() &gt;;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1150"></a>1150. wchar_t, char16_t and char32_t filenames</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.9.1.14 [fstream] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP 73</b></p>

   <p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>It is a problem
        from C++98, <tt>fstream</tt> cannot appoint a filename of wide
        character string(<tt>const wchar_t</tt> and <tt>const wstring&amp;</tt>).</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Add
        interface corresponding to <tt>wchar_t</tt>, <tt>char16_t</tt> and <tt>char32_t</tt>.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07-01 Alisdair notes that this is a duplicate of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#454">454</a> which has more
in-depth rationale.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-09-21 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I suggest to mark this issue as NAD Future with the intend to
solve the issue with a single file path c'tor template assuming
a provision of a TR2 filesystem library.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.  This is a duplicate of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#454">454</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1153"></a>1153. Standard library needs review for constructors to be
explicit to avoid treatment as initializer-list constructor</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library], 30 [thread], D [depr] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses DE 2</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>Marking a constructor with <tt>explicit</tt> has semantics
        even for a constructor with zero or several parameters:
        Such a constructor cannot be used with list-initialization
        in a copy-initialization context, see 13.3.1.7 [over.match.list]. The
        standard library apparently has not been reviewed for
        marking non-single-parameter constructors as <tt>explicit</tt>.</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Consider marking zero-parameter and multi-parameter
        constructors <tt>explicit</tt> in classes that have at least one
        constructor marked <tt>explicit</tt> and that do not have an
        initializer-list constructor.</p>

<p><b>Notes</b></p>
        <p>Robert Klarer to address this one.</p>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to "Open". Robert Klarer has promised to provide wording.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD, rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
We are unaware of any cases where initializer lists cause problem in this
context, but if problems arise in the future the issue can be reopened.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1154"></a>1154. <tt>complex</tt> should accept integral types</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses FR 35</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>Instantiations of the class
        template <tt>complex&lt;&gt;</tt> have to be allowed for integral
        types, to reflect existing practice and ISO standards
        (LIA-III).</p>
        
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>

<p><i>[
2009-10-26 Proposed wording in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3002.pdf">N3002</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Future.  Rationale added.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
There is no consensus for making this change at this time.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Adopt
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3002.pdf">N3002</a>.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1155"></a>1155. Reference should be to C99</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> C.2 [diff.library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#diff.library">issues</a> in [diff.library].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses FR 38</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>What is ISO/IEC 1990:9899/DAM
        1? My guess is that's a typo for ISO/IEC
        9899/Amd.1:1995 which I'd
        have expected to be referenced here (the tables
        make reference to things
        which were introduced by Amd.1).</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>One need probably a reference
        to the document which introduce <tt>char16_t</tt> and
        <tt>char32_t</tt> in C (ISO/IEC TR 19769:2004?).</p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create issue. Document in question should be C99, not C90+amendment1. The 
    rest of the section requires careful review for completeness. Example &lt;cstdint&gt; 
    18.4.1 [cstdint.syn]. Assign to C liasons.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial. Already fixed.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1156"></a>1156. Constraints on bitmask and enumeration types to be tightened</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.5.2.1.2 [enumerated.types], 17.5.2.1.3 [bitmask.types] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 165</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>Constraints on
        bitmask and enumeration types were supposed to be tightened
        up as part of the motivation for the <tt>constexpr</tt> feature -
        see paper
        <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2235.pdf">N2235</a>
        for details</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Adopt wording in line with the motivation
        described in
        <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2235.pdf">N2235</a></p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
        <p>Robert Klarer to review</p>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Open. Ping Robert Klarer to provide wording, using N2235 as
guidance.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD.  Rationale added.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
UK NB did not sufficiently describe how to resolve their comment, and
therefore we cannot make a change for the FCD. If a resolution were
provided in the future, we would be happy to apply it.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1160"></a>1160. <tt>future_error</tt> public constructor is 'exposition only'</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.3 [futures.future_error] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 331</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>Not clear what
        it means for a public constructor to be 'exposition only'.
        If the intent is purely to support the library calling this
        constructor then it can be made private and accessed
        through friendship. Otherwise it should be documented for
        public consumption.</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Declare the constructor as private with a
        note about intended friendship, or remove the
        exposition-only comment and document the semantics.</p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create an issue. Assigned to Detlef. Suggested resolution probably makes 
    sense.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Pending a paper from Anthony Williams / Detleff Volleman.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Pending paper:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2967.html">N2967</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1161"></a>1161. Unnecessary <tt>unique_future</tt> limitations</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.unique_future">issues</a> in [futures.unique_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 336</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>

        <p>It is possible
        to transfer ownership of the asynchronous result from one
        unique_future instance to another via the move-constructor.
        However, it is not possible to transfer it back, and nor is
        it possible to create a default-constructed unique_future
        instance to use as a later move target. This unduly limits
        the use of <tt>unique_future</tt> in code. Also, the lack of a
        move-assignment operator restricts the use of <tt>unique_future</tt>
        in containers such as <tt>std::vector</tt> - <tt>vector::insert</tt> requires
        move-assignable for example.</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Add a default constructor with the
        semantics that it creates a <tt>unique_future</tt> with no
        associated asynchronous result. Add a move-assignment
        operator which transfers ownership.</p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create an issue. Detlef will look into it.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Pending a paper from Anthony Williams / Detleff Volleman.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Pending paper:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2967.html">N2967</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1162"></a>1162. <tt>shared_future</tt> should support an efficient move constructor</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.shared_future">issues</a> in [futures.shared_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 337</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p><tt>shared_future</tt>
        should support an efficient move constructor that can avoid
        unnecessary manipulation of a reference count, much like
        <tt>shared_ptr</tt></p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Add a move constructor</p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create an issue. Detlef will look into it.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Pending a paper from Anthony Williams / Detleff Volleman.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Pending paper:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2967.html">N2967</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1163"></a>1163. <tt>shared_future</tt> is inconsistent with <tt>shared_ptr</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.shared_future">issues</a> in [futures.shared_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 338</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>

        <p><tt>shared_future</tt> is currently
        CopyConstructible, but not CopyAssignable. This is
        inconsistent with <tt>shared_ptr</tt>, and will surprise users.
        Users will then write work-arounds to provide this
        behaviour. We should provide it simply and efficiently as
        part of shared_future. Note that since the shared_future
        member functions for accessing the state are all declared
        const, the original usage of an immutable shared_future
        value that can be freely copied by multiple threads can be
        retained by declaring such an instance as "<tt>const
        shared_future</tt>".</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Remove "=delete"
        from the copy-assignment operator of shared_future. Add a
        move-constructor <tt>shared_future(shared_future&amp;&amp;
        rhs)</tt>, and a move-assignment operator <tt>shared_future&amp;
        operator=(shared_future&amp;&amp; rhs)</tt>. The postcondition
        for the copy-assignment operator is that <tt>*this</tt> has the same
        associated state as <tt>rhs</tt>. The postcondition for the
        move-constructor and move assignment is that <tt>*this</tt> has the
        same associated as <tt>rhs</tt> had before the
        constructor/assignment call and that <tt>rhs</tt> has no associated
        state.</p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create an issue. Detlef will look into it.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Pending a paper from Anthony Williams / Detleff Volleman.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-14 Pending paper:
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2967.html">N2967</a>.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.htm">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1164"></a>1164. <tt>promise::swap</tt> should pass by rvalue reference</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 341</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
<p><tt>promise::swap</tt> accepts its parameter by lvalue reference. This is
inconsistent with other types that provide a swap member function,
where those swap functions accept an rvalue reference</p>

<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
<p>Change <tt>promise::swap</tt> to take an rvalue reference.</p>

<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create an issue. Detlef will look into it. Probably ready as it.</p>  

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD, by virtue of the changed rvalue rules and swap signatures from Summit.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1165"></a>1165. Unneeded promise move constructor</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> LWG <b>Opened:</b> 2009-06-28 <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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses UK 343</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>The move constructor of a std::promise
        object does not need to allocate any memory, so the
        move-construct-with-allocator overload of the constructor
        is superfluous.</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>
        <p>Remove the
        constructor with the signature <tt>template &lt;class
        Allocator&gt; promise(allocator_arg_t, const Allocator&amp;
        a, promise&amp; rhs);</tt></p>
<p><b>Notes</b></p>
<p>Create an issue. Detlef will look into it. Will solicit feedback from Pablo. 
    Note that �rhs� argument should also be an rvalue reference in any case.</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07 Frankfurt
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Pending a paper from Anthony Williams / Detleff Volleman.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  Solved by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.html">N2997</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1166"></a>1166. Allocator-specific move/copy break model of move-constructor and
        move-assignment</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [allocator.propagation], X [allocator.propagation.map], 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US 77</b></p>

<p><b>Description</b></p>
        <p>Allocator-specific move and copy behavior for containers
        (<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2525.pdf">N2525</a>) complicates a little-used and already-complicated
        portion of the standard library (allocators), and breaks
        the conceptual model of move-constructor and
        move-assignment operations on standard containers being
        efficient operations. The extensions for allocator-specific
        move and copy behavior should be removed from the working
        paper.</p>
        <p>With the
        introduction of rvalue references, we are teaching
        programmers that moving from a standard container (e.g., a
        <tt>vector&lt;string&gt;</tt>) is an efficient, constant-time
        operation. The introduction of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2525.pdf">N2525</a> removed that
        guarantee; depending on the behavior of four different
        traits (20.8.4), the complexity of copy and move operations
        can be constant or linear time. This level of customization
        greatly increases the complexity of standard containers,
        and benefits only a tiny fraction of the C++ community.</p>
<p><b>Suggestion</b></p>

        <p>Remove 20.8.4.</p>
        
        <p>Remove 20.8.5.</p>
        
        <p>Remove all references to the facilities in
        20.8.4 and 20.8.5 from clause 23.</p>


<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  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="1167"></a>1167. <tt>pair&lt;T,U&gt;</tt> doesn't model <tt>LessThanComparable</tt> in unconstrained code even if
      <tt>T</tt> and <tt>U</tt> do.</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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Dave Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-01 <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#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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>LessThanComparable</tt> requires (and provides default
             implementations for) &lt;=,&gt;, and &gt;=.  However, the defaults
             don't take effect in unconstrained code.
</p>
<p>
Still, it's a problem to have types acting one way in
constrained code and another in unconstrained code, except in cases of
syntax adaptation.  It's also inconsistent with the containers, which
supply all those operators.
</p>
<p>
Totally Unbiased
Suggested Resolution:
</p>
<p>
accept the exported concept maps proposal and
                    change the way this stuff is handled to use an
                    explicit exported concept map rather than nested
                    function templates
</p>
<p>
e.g., remove from the body of <tt>std::list</tt>
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;LessThanComparable T, class Allocator&gt; 
bool operator&lt; (const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y); 
template &lt;LessThanComparable T, class Allocator&gt; 
bool operator&gt; (const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y); 
template &lt;LessThanComparable T, class Allocator&gt; 
bool operator&gt;=(const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y); 
template &lt;LessThanComparable T, class Allocator&gt; 
bool operator&lt;=(const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y); 
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
and add this concept_map afterwards:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;LessThanComparable T, class Allocator&gt; 
export concept_map LessThanComparable&lt;list&lt;T,Allocator&gt; &gt;
{
    bool operator&lt;(const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, const list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
do similarly for <tt>std::pair</tt>.  While you're at it, do the same for
<tt>operator==</tt> and <tt>!=</tt> everywhere, and seek out other such opportunities.
</p>
<p>
Alternative Resolution: keep the ugly, complex specification and add the
                       missing operators to <tt>std::pair</tt>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1168"></a>1168. Odd wording for bitset equality operators</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-02 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The following wording seems a little unusual to me:
</p>
<p>
p42/43 20.5.2 [bitset.members]
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>bool operator==(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp; rhs) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
-42- <i>Returns:</i> A nonzero value if the value of each bit in
<tt>*this</tt> equals the value of the corresponding bit in
<tt>rhs</tt>.
</blockquote>
<pre>bool operator!=(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp; rhs) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
-43- <i>Returns:</i> A nonzero value if <tt>!(*this == rhs)</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
"A nonzero value" may be well defined as equivalent to the literal '<tt>true</tt>'
for Booleans, but the wording is clumsy.  I suggest replacing "A nonzero value"
with the literal '<tt>true</tt>' (in appropriate font) in each case.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07-24 Alisdair recommends NAD Editorial.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-07-27 Pete adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
It's obviously editorial. There's no need for further discussion.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-07-27 Howard sets to NAD Editorial.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 20.5.2 [bitset.members] p42-43:
</p>

<blockquote>
<pre>bool operator==(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp; rhs) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
-42- <i>Returns:</i> <del>A nonzero value</del> <ins><tt>true</tt></ins> if the value of each bit in
<tt>*this</tt> equals the value of the corresponding bit in
<tt>rhs</tt>.
</blockquote>
<pre>bool operator!=(const bitset&lt;N&gt;&amp; rhs) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
-43- <i>Returns:</i> <del>A nonzero value</del> <ins><tt>true</tt></ins> if <tt>!(*this == rhs)</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1172"></a>1172. <tt>select_on_container_(copy|move)_construction</tt> over-constrained</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [allocator.concepts.members] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alberto Ganesh Barbati <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-08 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I believe the two functions
<tt>select_on_container_(copy|move)_construction()</tt> are over-constrained. For
example, the return value of the "copy" version is (see
X [allocator.concepts.members]/21):
</p>
<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>x</tt> if the allocator should propagate from the existing
container to the new container on copy construction, otherwise <tt>X()</tt>.
</blockquote>
<p>
Consider the case where a user decides to provide an explicit concept
map for Allocator to adapt some legacy allocator class, as he wishes to
provide customizations that the <tt>LegacyAllocator</tt> concept map template
does not provide.  Now, although it's true that the legacy class is
required to have a default constructor, the user might have reasons to
prefer a different constructor to implement
<tt>select_on_container_copy_construction()</tt>. However, the current wording
requires the use of the default constructor.
</p>
<p>
Moreover, it's not said explicitly that <tt>x</tt> is supposed to be the
allocator of the existing container. A clarification would do no harm.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Editorial.  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>
Replace X [allocator.concepts.members]/21 with:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>X select_on_container_copy_construction(const X&amp; x);
</pre>
<p>
-21- <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>x</tt> if the allocator should propagate from the existing
container to the new container on copy construction, otherwise <tt>X()</tt>.</del>
<ins>an allocator object to be used by the new container on copy
construction. [<i>Note:</i> <tt>x</tt> is the allocator of the existing container that
is being copied. The most obvious choices for the return value are <tt>x</tt>, if
the allocator should propagate from the existing container, and <tt>X()</tt>.
<i>� end note</i>]</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
Replace X [allocator.concepts.members]/25 with:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>X select_on_container_move_construction(X&amp;&amp; x);
</pre>
<p>
-25- <i>Returns:</i> <del><tt>move(x)</tt> if the allocator should propagate from the existing
container to the new container on move construction, otherwise <tt>X()</tt>.</del>
<ins>an allocator object to be used by the new container on move
construction. [<i>Note:</i> <tt>x</tt> is the allocator of the existing container that
is being moved. The most obvious choices for the return value are <tt>move(x)</tt>, if
the allocator should propagate from the existing container, and <tt>X()</tt>.
<i>� end note</i>]</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1173"></a>1173. "Equivalence" wishy-washiness</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-14 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Issue: The <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> requirements are wishy-washy.  It requires
that the copy is "equivalent" to the original, but "equivalent" is never
defined.
</p>
<p>
I believe this to be an example of a more general lack of rigor around
copy and assignment, although I haven't done the research to dig up all
the instances.
</p>
<p>
It's a problem because if you don't know what <tt>CopyConstructible</tt> means,
you also don't know what it means to copy a pair of <tt>CopyConstructible</tt>
types.  It doesn't prevent us from writing code, but it is a hole in our
ability to understand the meaning of copy.
</p>
<p>
Furthermore, I'm pretty sure that vector's copy constructor doesn't
require the elements to be <tt>EqualityComparable</tt>, so that table is actually
referring to some ill-defined notion of equivalence when it uses ==.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to "Open". Dave is right that this is a big issue. Paper D2987
("Defining Move Special Member Functions", Bjarne Stroustrup and
Lawrence Crowl) touches on this but does not solve it. This issue is
discussed in Elements of Programming.
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This issue is quite vague, so it is difficult to know if and when it has been resolved.

John Lakos wrote a paper covering this area a while back, and there is a real interest in providing some sort of clean-up in the future.

We need a more clearly draughted issues with an addressable set of concerns, ideally with a paper proposing a resolution, but for a future revision of the standard.

Move to Tentatively NAD Future.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Moved to NAD Future at 2010-11 Batavia
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1176"></a>1176. Make <tt>thread</tt> constructor non-variadic</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The variadic <tt>thread</tt> constructor is causing controversy, e.g.
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2901.pdf">N2901</a>.
This issue has been created as a placeholder for this course of action.
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class F<del>, class ...Args</del>&gt; thread(F&amp;&amp; f<del>, Args&amp;&amp;... args</del>);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#929">929</a> for wording which specifies an rvalue-ref signature but
with "decay behavior", but using variadics.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-17 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. 
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The (tentative) concensus of the LWG is to keep the variadic thread constructor.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1179"></a>1179. Probably editorial in [structure.specifications]</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Robert Klarer <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-21 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
While reviewing <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#971">971</a> I noted that 17.5.1.4 [structure.specifications]/7 says:
</p>

<blockquote>
-7- Error conditions specify conditions where a function may fail. The
conditions are listed, together with a suitable explanation, as the <tt>enum
class errc</tt> constants (19.5) that could be used as an argument to
function <tt>make_error_condition</tt> (19.5.3.6).
</blockquote>

<p>
This paragraph should mention <tt>make_error_code</tt> or the text "that
could be used as an argument to function <tt>make_error_condition</tt>
(19.5.3.6)" should be deleted.  I believe this is editorial.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-07-21 Chris adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I'm not convinced there's a problem there, because as far as the "Error
conditions" clauses are concerned, make_error_condition() is used by a
user to test for the condition, whereas make_error_code is not. For
example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void foobar(error_code&amp; ec = throws());
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
 Error conditions:
</p>
<blockquote>
permission_denied - Insufficient privilege to perform operation.
</blockquote>

<p>
When a user writes:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>error_code ec;
foobar(ec);
if (ec == errc::permission_denied)
   ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
the implicit conversion <tt>errc-&gt;error_condition</tt> makes the if-test
equivalent to:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>if (ec == make_error_condition(errc::permission_denied))
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
On the other hand, if the user had written:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>if (ec == make_error_code(errc::permission_denied))
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
the test is now checking for a specific error code. The test may
evaluate to <tt>false</tt> even though <tt>foobar()</tt> failed due to the documented
error condition "Insufficient privilege".
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
NAD Editorial.
</p>
<p>
What the WP says right now is literally true: these codes can be used as
an argument to <tt>make_error_condition</tt>. (It is also true that they can be
used as an argument to <tt>make_error_code</tt>, which the WP doesn't say.) Maybe
it would be clearer to just delete "that could be used as an argument to
function <tt>make_error_condition</tt>", since that fact is already implied by
other things that we say. We believe that this is editorial.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1184"></a>1184. Feature request: dynamic bitset</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-29 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Opened at Alisdair's request, steming from <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#96">96</a>.
Alisdair recommends NAD Future.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.  We want a heap allocated bitset, but we don't have one today and
don't have time to add one.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1185"></a>1185. iterator categories and output iterators</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2 [iterator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-31 <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.requirements">issues</a> in [iterator.requirements].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
(wording relative to
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2723.pdf">N2723</a>
pending new working paper)
</p>

<p>
According to p3 24.2 [iterator.requirements], Forward iterators,
Bidirectional iterators and Random Access iterators all satisfy the
requirements for an Output iterator:
</p>

<blockquote>
XXX iterators satisfy all the requirements of the input and output iterators
and can be used whenever either kind is specified ...
</blockquote>

<p>
Meanwhile, p4 goes on to contradict this:
</p>

<blockquote>
Besides its category, a forward, bidirectional, or random access
iterator can also be mutable or constant...
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
... Constant iterators do not satisfy the requirements for output iterators
</blockquote>

<p>
The latter seems to be the overriding concern, as the iterator tag
hierarchy does not define <tt>forward_iterator_tag</tt> as multiply derived from
both <tt>input_iterator_tag</tt> and <tt>output_iterator_tag</tt>.
</p>

<p>
The work on concepts for iterators showed us that output iterator really
is fundamentally a second dimension to the iterator categories, rather
than part of the linear input -&gt; forward -&gt; bidirectional -&gt;
random-access sequence.  It would be good to clear up these words to
reflect that, and separately list output iterator requirements in the
requires clauses for the appropriate algorithms and operations.
</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1186"></a>1186. Forward list could model a stack</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.5.3 [stack] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-07-31 <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#NAD Concepts">NAD Concepts</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The library template <tt>forward_list</tt> could easily model the idea of a
<tt>stack</tt>, where the operations work on the front of the list rather than
the back.  However, the standard library <tt>stack</tt> adaptor cannot support
this.
</p>

<p>
It would be relatively easy to write a partial specialization for <tt>stack</tt>
to support <tt>forward_list</tt>, but that opens the question of which header to
place it in.  A much better solution would be to add a <tt>concept_map</tt> for
the <tt>StackLikeContainer</tt> concept to the <tt>&lt;forward_list&gt;</tt> header and then
everything just works, including a user's own further uses in a
stack-like context.
</p>

<p>
Therefore while I am submitting the issue now so that it is on record, I
<em>strongly recommend</em> we resolve as "NAD Concepts" as any non-concepts
based solution will be inferior to the final goal, and the feature is
not so compelling it must be supported ahead of the concepts-based
library.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-02 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD Concepts after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Any non-concepts based solution will be inferior to the final goal, and the
feature is not so compelling it must be supported ahead of the concepts-based
library.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1188"></a>1188. Unordered containers should have a minimum load factor as well as a maximum</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-10 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Unordered associative containers have a notion of a maximum load factor:
when the number of elements grows large enough, the containers
automatically perform a rehash so that the number of elements per bucket
stays below a user-specified bound. This ensures that the hash table's
performance characteristics don't change dramatically as the size
increases.
</p>

<p>
For similar reasons, Google has found it useful to specify a minimum
load factor: when the number of elements shrinks by a large enough, the
containers automatically perform a rehash so that the number of elements
per bucket stays above a user-specified bound. This is useful for two
reasons. First, it prevents wasting a lot of memory when an unordered
associative container grows temporarily. Second, it prevents amortized
iteration time from being arbitrarily large; consider the case of a hash
table with a billion buckets and only one element. (This was discussed
even before TR1 was published; it was TR issue 6.13, which the LWG
closed as NAD on the grounds that it was a known design feature.
However, the LWG did not consider the approach of a minimum load
factor.)
</p>

<p>
The only interesting question is when shrinking is allowed. In principle
the cleanest solution would be shrinking on erase, just as we grow on
insert. However, that would be a usability problem; it would break a
number of common idioms involving erase. Instead, Google's hash tables
only shrink on insert and rehash.
</p>

<p>
The proposed resolution allows, but does not require, shrinking in
rehash, mostly because a postcondition for rehash that involves the
minimum load factor would be fairly complicated. (It would probably have
to involve a number of special cases and it would probably have to
mention yet another parameter, a minimum bucket count.)
</p>

<p>
The current behavior is equivalent to a minimum load factor of 0. If we
specify that 0 is the default, this change will have no impact on
backward compatibility.
</p>


<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This seems to a useful extension, but is too late for 0x.

Move to Tentatively NAD Future.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Moved to NAD Future at 2010-11 Batavia
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add two new rows, and change rehash's postcondition in the unordered
associative container requirements table in 23.2.5 [unord.req]:
</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><ins>
<tt>a.min_load_factor()</tt>
</ins></td>
<td><ins>
<tt>float</tt>
</ins></td>
<td><ins>
Returns a non-negative number that the container attempts to keep the
load factor greater than or equal to. The container automatically
decreases the number of buckets as necessary to keep the load factor
above this number.
</ins></td>
<td><ins>
constant
</ins></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td><ins><tt>a.min_load_factor(z)</tt></ins></td>
<td><ins><tt>void</tt></ins></td>
<td><ins>Pre: <tt>z</tt> shall be non-negative. Changes the container's minimum
load factor, using <tt>z</tt> as a hint. [<i>Footnote:</i> the minimum
load factor should be significantly smaller than the maximum. 
If <tt>z</tt> is too large, the implementation may reduce it to a more sensible value.]
</ins></td>
<td><ins>
constant
</ins></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><tt>a.rehash(n)</tt></td>
<td><tt>void</tt></td>
<td>
Post: <ins><tt>a.bucket_count() &gt;= n</tt>, and <tt>a.size() &lt;= a.bucket_count()
* a.max_load_factor()</tt>. [<i>Footnote:</i> It is intentional that the
postcondition does not mention the minimum load factor.
This member function is primarily intended for cases where the user knows
that the container's size will increase soon, in which case the container's
load factor will temporarily fall below <tt>a.min_load_factor()</tt>.]</ins>
<del>
<tt>a.bucket_cout &gt; a.size() / a.max_load_factor()</tt> and <tt>a.bucket_count()
&gt;= n</tt>.
</del>
</td>
<td>
Average case linear in <tt>a.size()</tt>, worst case quadratic.
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
Add a footnote to 23.2.5 [unord.req] p12:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The insert members shall not affect the validity of references to
container elements, but may invalidate all iterators to the container.
The erase members shall invalidate only iterators and references to the
erased elements.
</p>

<blockquote><ins>
[A consequence of these requirements is that while insert may change the
number of buckets, erase may not. The number of buckets may be reduced
on calls to insert or rehash.]
</ins></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change paragraph 13:
</p>

<blockquote>
The insert members shall not affect the validity of iterators if
<del><tt>(N+n) &lt; z * B</tt></del> <ins><tt>zmin * B &lt;= (N+n) &lt;= zmax * B</tt></ins>,
where <tt>N</tt> is the number of elements in
the container prior to the insert operation, <tt>n</tt> is the number of
elements inserted, <tt>B</tt> is the container's bucket count,
<ins><tt>zmin</tt> is the container's minimum load factor,</ins>
and <tt>z<ins>max</ins></tt> is the container's maximum load factor.
</blockquote>

<p>
Add to the <tt>unordered_map</tt> class synopsis in section 23.7.1 [unord.map],
the <tt>unordered_multimap</tt> class synopsis
in 23.7.2 [unord.multimap], the <tt>unordered_set</tt> class synopsis in
23.7.3 [unord.set], and the <tt>unordered_multiset</tt> class synopsis
in 23.7.4 [unord.multiset]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>
float min_load_factor() const;
void min_load_factor(float z);
</ins></pre></blockquote>

<p>
In 23.7.1.1 [unord.map.cnstr], 23.7.2.1 [unord.multimap.cnstr], 23.7.3.1 [unord.set.cnstr], and
23.7.4.1 [unord.multiset.cnstr], change:
</p>

<blockquote>
... <tt>max_load_factor()</tt> returns 1.0 <ins>and
<tt>min_load_factor()</tt> returns 0</ins>.
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1190"></a>1190. Setting the maximum load factor should return the previous value</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matt Austern <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-10 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The unordered associative container requirements table specifies that
<tt>a.set_max_load_factor(z)</tt> has return type <tt>void</tt>. However, there is a
useful piece of information to return: the previous value. Users who
don't need it can always ignore it.
</p>


<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The benefit seems minor, while breaking with the getter/setter idiom these overloads support.

Move to Tentatively NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Moved to NAD at 2010-11 Batavia
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In the unordered associative container requirements table, change:
</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.max_load_factor(z)</tt></td>
<td><tt><del>void</del> <ins>float</ins></tt></td>
<td>Pre: <tt>z</tt> shall be positive. Changes the container's maximum
<del>load</del> load factor, using <tt>z</tt> as a hint.
<ins>Returns: the previous value of
<tt>a.max_load_factor()</tt>.</ins>
</td>
<td>
constant
</td>
</tr>
<tr></tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change the return type of <tt>set_max_load_factor</tt>
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>

<p>
If issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1188">1188</a> is also accepted, make the same changes for
<tt>min_load_factor</tt>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1196"></a>1196. move semantics undefined for priority_queue</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.5.2.1 [priqueue.cons] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-08-19 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The class template <tt>priority_queue</tt> declares signatures for a move
constructor and move assignment operator in its class definition.
However, it does not provide a definition (unlike <tt>std::queue</tt>, and
proposed resolution for <tt>std::stack</tt>.) Nor does it provide a text clause
specifying their behaviour.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-08-23 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a> provides wording that solves this issue.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark NAD Editorial, solved by issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1194">1194</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1200"></a>1200. "surprising" <tt>char_traits&lt;T&gt;::int_type</tt> 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sean Hunt <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-03 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The footnote for <tt>int_type</tt> in 21.2.2 [char.traits.typedefs] says that
</p>

<blockquote>
If <tt>eof()</tt>
can be held in <tt>char_type</tt> then some iostreams implementations may give
surprising results.
</blockquote>

<p>
This implies that <tt>int_type</tt> should be a superset of
<tt>char_type</tt>. However, the requirements for <tt>char16_t</tt> and <tt>char32_t</tt> define
<tt>int_type</tt> to be equal to <tt>int_least16_t</tt> and <tt>int_least32_t</tt> respectively.
<tt>int_least16_t</tt> is likely to be the same size as <tt>char_16_t</tt>, which may lead
to surprising behavior, even if <tt>eof()</tt> is not a valid UTF-16 code unit.
The standard should not prescribe surprising behavior, especially
without saying what it is (it's apparently not undefined, just
surprising). The same applies for 32-bit types.
</p>

<p>
I personally recommend that behavior be undefined if <tt>eof()</tt> is a member
of <tt>char_type</tt>, and another type be chosen for <tt>int_type</tt> (my personal
favorite has always been a <tt>struct {bool eof; char_type c;}</tt>).
Alternatively, the exact results of such a situation should be defined,
at least so far that I/O could be conducted on these types as long as
the code units remain valid. Note that the argument that no one streams
<tt>char16_t</tt> or <tt>char32_t</tt> is not really valid as it would be perfectly
reasonable to use a <tt>basic_stringstream</tt> in conjunction with UTF character
types.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10-28 Ganesh provides two possible resolutions and expresses a preference
for the second:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Replace 21.2.3.2 [char.traits.specializations.char16_t] para 3 with:
</p>

<blockquote>
The member <tt>eof()</tt> shall return <del>an implementation-defined
constant that cannot appear as a valid UTF-16 code unit</del>
<ins><tt>UINT_LEAST16_MAX</tt> [<i>Note:</i> this value is guaranteed to
be a permanently reserved UCS-2 code position if <tt>UINT_LEAST16_MAX ==
0xFFFF</tt> and it's not a UCS-2 code position otherwise � <i>end
note</i>]</ins>.
</blockquote>

<p>
Replace 21.2.3.3 [char.traits.specializations.char32_t] para 3 with:
</p>

<blockquote>
The member <tt>eof()</tt> shall return <del>an implementation-defined constant that
cannot appear as a Unicode code point</del>
<ins>
<tt>UINT_LEAST32_MAX</tt> [<i>Note:</i> this value is guaranteed to be a
permanently reserved UCS-4 code position if <tt>UINT_LEAST32_MAX ==
0xFFFFFFFF</tt> and it's not a UCS-4 code position otherwise � <i>end
note</i>]</ins>.
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In 21.2.3.2 [char.traits.specializations.char16_t], in the
definition of <tt>char_traits&lt;char16_t&gt;</tt> replace the definition of nested
typedef <tt>int_type</tt> with:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
  template&lt;&gt; struct char_traits&lt;char16_t&gt; {
    typedef char16_t         char_type;
    typedef <del>uint_least16_t</del> <ins>uint_fast16_t</ins> int_type;
     ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Replace 21.2.3.2 [char.traits.specializations.char16_t] para 3 with:
</p>

<blockquote>
The member <tt>eof()</tt> shall return <del>an implementation-defined
constant that cannot appear as a valid UTF-16 code unit</del>
<ins><tt>UINT_FAST16_MAX</tt> [<i>Note:</i> this value is guaranteed to
be a permanently reserved UCS-2 code position if <tt>UINT_FAST16_MAX ==
0xFFFF</tt> and it's not a UCS-2 code position otherwise � <i>end
note</i>]</ins>.
</blockquote>

<p>
In 21.2.3.3 [char.traits.specializations.char32_t], in the
definition of <tt>char_traits&lt;char32_t&gt;</tt> replace the definition of nested
typedef <tt>int_type</tt> with:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
  template&lt;&gt; struct char_traits&lt;char32_t&gt; {
    typedef char32_t         char_type;
    typedef <del>uint_least32_t</del> <ins>uint_fast32_t</ins> int_type;
     ...
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Replace 21.2.3.3 [char.traits.specializations.char32_t] para 3 with:
</p>

<blockquote>
The member <tt>eof()</tt> shall return <del>an implementation-defined constant that
cannot appear as a Unicode code point</del>
<ins>
<tt>UINT_FAST32_MAX</tt> [<i>Note:</i> this value is guaranteed to be a
permanently reserved UCS-4 code position if <tt>UINT_FAST32_MAX ==
0xFFFFFFFF</tt> and it's not a UCS-4 code position otherwise � <i>end
note</i>]</ins>.
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>


<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This seems an overspecification, and it is not clear what problem is being solved - these values can be used portably by using the named functions; there is no need for the value itself to be portable.

Move to Tentatively NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Moved to NAD at 2010-11 Batavia
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1201"></a>1201. Do we always want to unwrap <tt>ref</tt>-wrappers in <tt>make_tuple</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation], 20.3.5 [pairs] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-05 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Spotting a recent thread on the boost lists regarding collapsing
optional representations in <tt>optional&lt;optional&lt;T&gt;&gt;</tt> instances, I wonder if
we have some of the same issues with <tt>make_tuple</tt>, and now <tt>make_pair</tt>?
</p>

<p>
Essentially, if my generic code in my own library is handed a
<tt>reference_wrapper</tt> by a user, and my library in turn delegates some logic
to <tt>make_pair</tt> or <tt>make_tuple</tt>, then I am going to end up with a <tt>pair</tt>/<tt>tuple</tt>
holding a real reference rather than the intended reference wrapper.
</p>

<p>
There are two things as a library author I can do at this point:
</p>

<ol type="i">
<li>
document my library also has the same reference-wrapper behaviour as
<tt>std::make_tuple</tt>
</li>
<li>
roll my own <tt>make_tuple</tt> that does not unwrap rereferences, a lost
opportunity to re-use the standard library.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
(There may be some metaprogramming approaches my library can use to wrap
the <tt>make_tuple</tt> call, but all will be significantly more complex than
simply implementing a simplified <tt>make_tuple</tt>.)
</p>

<p>
Now I don't propose we lose this library facility, I think unwrapping
references will be the common behaviour.  However, we might want to
consider adding another overload that does nothing special with
<tt>ref</tt>-wrappers.  Note that we already have a second overload of <tt>make_tuple</tt>
in the library, called <tt>tie</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-09-30 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I suggest to change the currently proposed paragraph for
<tt>make_simple_pair</tt>
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename... Types&gt;
  pair&lt;typename decay&lt;Types&gt;::type...&gt; make_simple_pair(Types&amp;&amp;... t);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<del><i>Type requirements:</i> <tt>sizeof...(Types) == 2</tt>.</del>
<ins><i>Remarks:</i> The program shall be ill-formed, if
<tt>sizeof...(Types) != 2</tt>.</ins>
</p>
<p>
...
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
or alternatively (but with a slightly different semantic):
</p>

<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Remarks:</i> If <tt>sizeof...(Types) != 2</tt>, this function shall not
participate in overload resolution.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
to follow a currently introduced style and because the library does
not have yet a specific "<i>Type requirements</i>" element. If such thing
would be considered as useful this should be done as a separate
issue. Given the increasing complexity of either of these wordings
it might be preferable to use the normal two-argument-declaration
style again in either of the following ways:
</p>

<ol type="A">
<li>
<pre>template&lt;class T1, class T2&gt;
pair&lt;typename decay&lt;T1&gt;::type, typename decay&lt;T2&gt;::type&gt;
make_simple_pair(T1&amp;&amp; t1, T2&amp;&amp; t2);
</pre>
</li>
<li>
<pre>template&lt;class T1, class T2&gt;
pair&lt;V1, V2&gt; make_simple_pair(T1&amp;&amp; t1, T2&amp;&amp; t2);
</pre>
<blockquote>
Let <tt>V1</tt> be <tt>typename decay&lt;T1&gt;::type</tt> and <tt>V2</tt> be
<tt>typename decay&lt;T2&gt;::type</tt>.
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as Tentatively NAD Future.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Does not have sufficient support at this time. May wish to reconsider for a
future standard.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the following function to 20.3.5 [pairs] and signature in
appropriate synopses:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename... Types&gt;
  pair&lt;typename decay&lt;Types&gt;::type...&gt; make_simple_pair(Types&amp;&amp;... t);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Type requirements:</i> <tt>sizeof...(Types) == 2</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>pair&lt;typename decay&lt;Types&gt;::type...&gt;(std::forward&lt;Types&gt;(t)...)</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Draughting note: I chose a variadic representation similar to <tt>make_tuple</tt>
rather than naming both types as it is easier to read through the
clutter of metaprogramming this way.  Given there are exactly two
elements, the committee may prefer to draught with two explicit template
type parameters instead
]</i></p>


<p>
Add the following function to 20.4.2.4 [tuple.creation] and
signature in appropriate synopses:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename... Types&gt;
  tuple&lt;typename decay&lt;Types&gt;::type...&gt; make_simple_tuple(Types&amp;&amp;... t);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>tuple&lt;typename decay&lt;Types&gt;::type...&gt;(std::forward&lt;Types&gt;(t)...)</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1202"></a>1202. <tt>integral_constant</tt> needs a spring clean</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-05 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The specification of <tt>integral_constant</tt> has been inherited
essentially unchanged from TR1:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, T v&gt;
struct integral_constant {
  static const T value = v;
  typedef T value_type;
  typedef integral_constant&lt;T,v&gt; type;
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
In light of 0x language changes there are several things we might
consider changing, notably the form of specification for value.
</p>

<p>
The current form requires a static data member have storage allocated
for it, where we could now implement without this using the new enum
syntax:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, T v&gt;
struct integral_constant {
  <b>enum : T { value = v };</b>
  typedef T value_type;
  typedef integral_constant type;
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The effective difference between these two implementation is:
</p>

<ol type="i">
<li>
No requirement to allocate storage for data member (which we hope but do
not guarantee compilers strip today)
</li>

<li>
You can no longer take the address of the constant as
<tt>&amp;integral_constant&lt;T,v&gt;::value;</tt>
</li>
</ol>

<p>
Also note the editorial change to drop the explicit qualification of
<tt>integral_constant</tt> in the <tt>typedef type</tt>.  This makes it quite clear we
mean the current instantiation, and cannot be mistaken for a recursive
metaprogram.
</p>

<p>
Even if we don't mandate this implementation, it would be nice to give
vendors freedom under QoI to choose their preferred representation.
</p>

<p>
The other side of this issue is if we choose to retain the static
constant form.  In that case we should go further and insist on
<tt>constexpr</tt>, much like we did throughout <tt>numeric_limits</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, T v&gt;
struct integral_constant {
  static <b>constexpr</b> T value = v;
  typedef T value_type;
  typedef integral_constant type;
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
[Footnote] It turns out <tt>constexpr</tt> is part of the Tentatively Ready
resolution for <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1019">1019</a>.  I don't want to interfere with that issue, but
would like a new issue to consider if the fixed-base enum implementation
should be allowed.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-09-05 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I think that the suggested resolution is incomplete and
may have some possible unwanted side-effects. To understand
why, note that <tt>integral_constant</tt> is <em>completely</em> specified
by code in 20.7.3 [meta.help]. While this is usually considered
as a good thing, let me give a possible user-defined
specialization that would break given the suggested changes:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>enum NodeColor { Red, Black };

std::integral_constant&lt;NodeColor, Red&gt; red;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The reason why that breaks is due to the fact that
current core language rules does only allow integral
types as enum-bases, see 7.2 [dcl.enum]/2.
</p>

<p>
So, I think that we cannot leave the implementation the
freedom to decide which way they would like to provide
the implementation, because that is easily user-visible
(I don't speak of addresses, but of instantiation errors),
therefore if applied, this should be either specified or
wording must be added that gives a note about this
freedom of implementation.
</p>

<p>
Another possible disadvantage seems to me that user-expectations
are easy to disappoint if they see a failure
of the test
</p>

<blockquote><pre>assert(typeid(std::integral_constant&lt;int, 0&gt;::value) == typeid(int));
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
or of
</p>

<blockquote><pre>static_assert(std::is_same&lt;decltype(std::integral_constant&lt;int, 0&gt;::value), const int&gt;::value, "Bad library");
</pre></blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-14 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
We think that the suggested resolution is incomplete and may have some possible
unwanted side-effects.  (see Daniel's 2009-09-05 comment for details).
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1203"></a>1203. More useful rvalue stream insertion</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 27.7.2.9 [ostream.rvalue], 27.7.1.6 [istream.rvalue] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-06 <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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
27.7.2.9 [ostream.rvalue] was created to preserve the ability to insert
into (and extract from 27.7.1.6 [istream.rvalue]) rvalue streams:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class charT, class traits, class T&gt;
  basic_ostream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;
  operator&lt;&lt;(basic_ostream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;&amp; os, const T&amp; x);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
1 <i>Effects:</i> <tt>os &lt;&lt; x</tt>
</p>
<p>
2 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>os</tt>
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
This is good as it allows code that wants to (for example) open, write to, and
close an <tt>ofstream</tt> all in one statement:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::ofstream("log file") &lt;&lt; "Some message\n";
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
However, I think we can easily make this "rvalue stream helper" even easier to
use.  Consider trying to quickly create a formatted string.  With the current
spec you have to write:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::string s = static_cast&lt;std::ostringstream&amp;&gt;(std::ostringstream() &lt;&lt; "i = " &lt;&lt; i).str();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This will store "<tt>i = 10</tt>" (for example) in the string <tt>s</tt>.  Note
the need to cast the stream back to <tt>ostringstream&amp;</tt> prior to using
the member <tt>.str()</tt>.  This is necessary because the inserter has cast
the <tt>ostringstream</tt> down to a more generic <tt>ostream</tt> during the
insertion process.
</p>

<p>
I believe we can re-specify the rvalue-inserter so that this cast is unnecessary.
Thus our customer now has to only type:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::string s = (std::ostringstream() &lt;&lt; "i = " &lt;&lt; i).str();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This is accomplished by having the rvalue stream inserter return an rvalue of
the same type, instead of casting it down to the base class.  This is done by
making the stream generic, and constraining it to be an rvalue of a type derived
from <tt>ios_base</tt>.
</p>

<p>
The same argument and solution also applies to the inserter.  This code has been
implemented and tested.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.  No concensus for change.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 27.7.1.6 [istream.rvalue]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class <del>charT, class traits</del> <ins>Istream</ins>, class T&gt;
  <del>basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;</del> <ins>Istream&amp;&amp;</ins>
  operator&gt;&gt;(<del>basic_istream&lt;charT, traits&gt;</del> <ins>Istream</ins>&amp;&amp; is, T&amp; x);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
1 <i>Effects:</i> <tt>is &gt;&gt; x</tt>
</p>
<p>
2 <i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>is<ins>)</ins></tt>
</p>
<p><ins>
3 <i>Remarks:</i> This signature shall participate in overload resolution if
and only if <tt>Istream</tt> is not an lvalue reference type and is derived from
<tt>ios_base</tt>.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Change 27.7.2.9 [ostream.rvalue]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class <del>charT, class traits</del> <ins>Ostream</ins>, class T&gt;
  <del>basic_ostream&lt;charT, traits&gt;&amp;</del> <ins>Ostream&amp;&amp;</ins>
  operator&lt;&lt;(<del>basic_ostream&lt;charT, traits&gt;</del> <ins>Ostream</ins>&amp;&amp; os, const T&amp; x);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
1 <i>Effects:</i> <tt>os &lt;&lt; x</tt>
</p>
<p>
2 <i>Returns:</i> <tt><ins>std::move(</ins>os<ins>)</ins></tt>
</p>
<p><ins>
3 <i>Remarks:</i> This signature shall participate in overload resolution if
and only if <tt>Ostream</tt> is not an lvalue reference type and is derived from
<tt>ios_base</tt>.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1210"></a>1210. iterator reachability should not require a container</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2 [iterator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-18 <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#iterator.requirements">issues</a> in [iterator.requirements].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
p6 Iterator requirements 24.2 [iterator.requirements]
</p>

<blockquote>
An iterator <tt>j</tt> is called reachable from an iterator <tt>i</tt> if and only if
there is a finite sequence of applications of the expression <tt>++i</tt> that
makes <tt>i == j</tt>. If <tt>j</tt> is reachable from <tt>i</tt>, they refer to the same
container.
</blockquote>

<p>
A good example would be stream iterators, which do not refer to a
container.  Typically, the end iterator from a range of stream iterators
will compare equal for many such ranges.  I suggest striking the second
sentence.
</p>

<p>
An alternative wording might be:
</p>

<blockquote>
If <tt>j</tt> is reachable from <tt>i</tt>, and both <tt>i</tt> and
<tt>j</tt> are dereferencable iterators, then they refer to the same
range.
</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 24.2 [iterator.requirements], p6:
</p>

<blockquote>
An iterator <tt>j</tt> is called <i>reachable</i> from an iterator
<tt>i</tt> if and only if there is a finite sequence of applications of
the expression <tt>++i</tt> that makes <tt>i == j</tt>. <del>If
<tt>j</tt> is reachable from <tt>i</tt>, they refer to the same
container.</del>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1211"></a>1211. move iterators should be restricted as input iterators</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-18 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I contend that while we can support both bidirectional and random access
traversal, the category of a move iterator should never be better than
<tt>input_iterator_tag</tt>.
</p>

<p>
The contentious point is that you cannot truly have a multipass property
when values are moved from a range.  This is contentious if you view a
moved-from object as still holding a valid value within the range.  
</p>

<p>
The second reason comes from the Forward Iterator requirements table:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Forward iterators 24.2.5 [forward.iterators]
</p>

<p>
Table 102 -- Forward iterator requirements
</p>

<blockquote>
For expression <tt>*a</tt> the return type is:
"<tt>T&amp;</tt> if <tt>X</tt> is mutable, otherwise <tt>const T&amp;</tt>"
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
There is a similar constraint on <tt>a-&gt;m</tt>.
</p>

<p>
There is no support for rvalue references, nor do I believe their should
be.  Again, opinions may vary but either this table or the definition of
<tt>move_iterator</tt> need updating.
</p>

<p>
Note: this requirement probably need updating anyway if we wish to
support proxy iterators but I am waiting to see a new working paper
before filing that issue.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to Open. Howard to put his rationale mentioned above into the issue
as a note.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10-26 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
<tt>vector::insert(pos, iter, iter)</tt> is significantly more effcient when
<tt>iter</tt> is a random access iterator, as compared to when it is an
input iterator.
</p>

<p>
When <tt>iter</tt> is an input iterator, the best algorithm
is to append the inserted range to the end of the <tt>vector</tt> using
<tt>push_back</tt>.  This may involve several reallocations before the input
range is exhausted.  After the append, then one can use <tt>std::rotate</tt>
to place the inserted range into the correct position in the vector.
</p>

<p>
But when <tt>iter</tt> is a random access iterator, the best algorithm
is to first compute the size of the range to be inserted (<tt>last - first</tt>),
do a buffer reallocation if necessary, scoot existing elements in the <tt>vector</tt>
down to make the "hole", and then insert the new elements directly to their correct
place.
</p>

<blockquote><b>
The insert-with-random-access-iterators algorithm is considerably more efficient
than the insert-with-input-iterators algorithm
</b></blockquote>

<p>
Now consider:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>vector&lt;A&gt; v;
<font color="#C80000">//  ... build up a large vector of A ...</font>
vector&lt;A&gt; temp;
<font color="#C80000">//  ... build up a large temporary vector of A to later be inserted ...</font>
typedef move_iterator&lt;vector&lt;A&gt;::iterator&gt; MI;
<font color="#C80000">//  Now insert the temporary elements:</font>
v.insert(v.begin() + N, MI(temp.begin()), MI(temp.end()));
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
A major motivation for using <tt>move_iterator</tt> in the above example is the
expectation that <tt>A</tt> is cheap to move but expensive to copy.  I.e. the
customer is looking for <em>high performance</em>.  If we allow <tt>vector::insert</tt>
to subtract two <tt>MI</tt>'s to get the distance between them, the customer enjoys
substantially better performance, compared to if we say that <tt>vector::insert</tt>
can not subtract two <tt>MI</tt>'s.
</p>

<p>
I can find no rationale for not giving this performance boost to our customers.
Therefore I am strongly against restricting <tt>move_iterator</tt> to the
<tt>input_iterator_tag</tt> category.
</p>

<p>
I believe that the requirement that forward
iterators have a dereference that returns an lvalue reference to cause unacceptable
pessimization.  For example <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;::iterator</tt> also does not return
a <tt>bool&amp;</tt> on dereference.  Yet I am not aware of a single vendor that
is willing to ship <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;::iterator</tt> as an input iterator.
Everyone classifies it as a random access iterator.  Not only does this not
cause any problems, it prevents significant performance problems.
</p>

</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Class template move_iterator 24.5.3.1 [move.iterator]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
template &lt;class Iterator&gt;
class move_iterator {
public:
 ...
 typedef <del>typename iterator_traits&lt;Iterator&gt;::iterator_category</del> <ins>input_iterator_tag</ins> iterator_category;
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1212"></a>1212. result of post-increment/decrement operator</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 24.2 [iterator.requirements] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-18 <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#iterator.requirements">issues</a> in [iterator.requirements].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Forward iterator and bidirectional iterator place different requirements on the result of post-increment/decrement operator.  The same form should be used in each case.
</p>

<p>
Merging row from:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>Table 102 -- Forward iterator requirements
Table 103 -- Bidirectional iterator requirements

    r++ : convertible to const X&amp;
    r-- : convertible to const X&amp;
    
    *r++ : T&amp; if X is mutable, otherwise const T&amp;
    *r-- : convertible to T
</pre></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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1217"></a>1217. Quaternion support</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ted Shaneyfelt <b>Opened:</b> 2009-09-26 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Concerning mathematically proper operation of the type:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Generally accepted mathematical semantics of such a construct correspond
to quaternions through Cayly-Dickson construct
</p>

<blockquote><pre>(w+xi) + (y+zi) j
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The proper implementation seems straightforward by adding a few
declarations like those below. I have included operator definition for
combining real scalars and complex types, as well, which seems
appropriate, as algebra of complex numbers allows mixing complex and
real numbers with operators. It also allows for constructs such as
<tt>complex&lt;double&gt; i=(0,1),  x = 12.34 + 5*i;</tt>
</p>

<p>
Quaternions are often used in areas such as computer graphics, where,
for example, they avoid the problem of Gimbal lock when rotating objects
in 3D space, and can be more efficient than matrix multiplications,
although I am applying them to a different field.
</p>

<pre>/////////////////////////ALLOW OPERATORS TO COMBINE REAL SCALARS AND COMPLEX VALUES /////////////////////////
template&lt;typename T,typename S&gt; complex&lt;T&gt; operator+(const complex&lt;T&gt; x,const S a) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; result(x.real()+a, x.imag());
    return result;
}
template&lt;typename T,typename S&gt; complex&lt;T&gt; operator+(const S a,const complex&lt;T&gt; x) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; result(a+x.real(), x.imag());
    return result;
}
template&lt;typename T,typename S&gt; complex&lt;T&gt; operator-(const complex&lt;T&gt; x,const S a) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; result(x.real()-a, x.imag());
    return result;
}
template&lt;typename T,typename S&gt; complex&lt;T&gt; operator-(const S a,const complex&lt;T&gt; x) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; result(a-x.real(), x.imag());
    return result;
}
template&lt;typename T,typename S&gt; complex&lt;T&gt; operator*(const complex&lt;T&gt; x,const S a) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; result(x.real()*a, x.imag()*a);
    return result;
}
template&lt;typename T,typename S&gt; complex&lt;T&gt; operator*(const S a,const complex&lt;T&gt; x) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; result(a*x.real(), a*x.imag());
    return result;
}

/////////////////////////PROPERLY IMPLEMENT QUATERNION SEMANTICS/////////////////////////
template&lt;typename T&gt; double normSq(const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt;q) {
    return q.real().real()*q.real().real()
         + q.real().imag()*q.real().imag()
         + q.imag().real()*q.imag().real()
         + q.imag().imag()*q.imag().imag();
}
template&lt;typename T&gt; double norm(const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt;q) {
    return sqrt(normSq(q));
}
/////// Cayley-Dickson Construction
template&lt;typename T&gt; complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; conj(const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; x) {
    complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; result(conj(x.real()),-x.imag());
    return result;
}
template&lt;typename T&gt; complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; operator*(const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; ab,const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; cd) {
    complex&lt;T&gt; re(ab.real()*cd.real()-conj(cd.imag())*ab.imag());
    complex&lt;T&gt; im(cd.imag()*ab.real()+ab.imag()*conj(cd.real()));
    complex&lt;complex&lt;double&gt; &gt; q(re,im);
    return q;
}
//// Quaternion division
template&lt;typename S,typename T&gt; complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; operator/(const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; q,const S a) {
    return q * (1/a);
}
template&lt;typename S,typename T&gt; complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; operator/(const S a,const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; q) {
    return a*conj(q)/normSq(q);
}
template&lt;typename T&gt; complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; operator/(const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; n, const complex&lt;complex&lt;T&gt; &gt; d) {
    return n * (conj(d)/normSq(d));
}
</pre>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.  There is no consensus or time to move this into C++0X.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1219"></a>1219. unique_lock::lock and resource_deadlock_would_occur</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#Dup">Dup</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.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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1159">1159</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>



<p>
<tt>unique_lock::lock</tt> and friends raise
"<tt>resource_deadlock_would_occur</tt> -- if the current thread already
owns the mutex (i.e., on entry, <tt>owns</tt> is <tt>true</tt>)."  1)
The current thread owning a mutex is not the same as any particular
<tt>unique_lock::owns</tt> being <tt>true</tt>. 2) There's no need to
raise this exception for a <tt>recursive_mutex</tt> if <tt>owns</tt> is
<tt>false</tt>. 3) If <tt>owns</tt> is true, we need to raise some
exception or the unique_lock will lose track of whether to unlock itself
on destruction, but "deadlock" isn't it. For (3), s/bool owns/int
ownership_level/ would fix it.
</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-defects.html#1159">1159</a>,
if not a dup.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2009-11-14 Moved to Tentatively Dup after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1223"></a>1223. condition_variable_any lock matching?</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
For <tt>condition_variable_any</tt>, must all lock arguments to concurrent wait calls
"match" in some way, similar to the requirement in
30.5.1 [thread.condition.condvar] that <tt>lock.mutex()</tt> returns the same
value for each of the lock arguments supplied by all concurrently
waiting threads (via <tt>wait</tt> or <tt>timed_wait</tt>)?
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. 
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The rationale is that it doesn't matter, and you can't check: the lock types may
be different, or the same and user-defined, so the implementation must provide
internal synchronization anyway.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1224"></a>1224. condition_variable_any support for recursive mutexes?</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#NAD">NAD</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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
For <tt>condition_variable_any</tt>, are recursive mutexes allowed? (I think "no")
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-17 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. 
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
<tt>condition_variable_any::wait</tt> accepts any type of mutex. It calls
<tt>unlock</tt> precisely once on entry and <tt>lock</tt> precisely once on
exit. It is up to the user to ensure that this provides the required
synchronization. Use of a recursive mutex is safe if either its lock count is 1,
so after the single unlock it can be acquired by another thread, or another
mechanism is used to synchronize the data.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1225"></a>1225. C++0x result_of issue </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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sebastian Gesemann <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I think the text about <tt>std::result_of</tt> could be a little more precise.
Quoting from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a>...
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
X [func.ret] Function object return types
</p>

<pre>template&lt;class&gt; class result_of;

template&lt;class Fn, class... ArgTypes&gt;
class result_of&lt;Fn(ArgTypes...)&gt; {
public:
  typedef <i>see below</i> type;
};
</pre>

<p>
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>
respectivly, 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.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p>
This text doesn't seem to consider lvalue reference types for <tt>Fn</tt>.
Also, it's not clear whether this class template can be used for
"SFINAE" like <tt>std::enable_if</tt>. Example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename Fn, typename... Args&gt;
typename std::result_of&lt;Fn(Args...)&gt;::type
apply(Fn &amp;&amp; fn, Args &amp;&amp; ...args)
{
  // Fn may be an lvalue reference, too
  return std::forward&lt;Fn&gt;(fn)(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Either <tt>std::result_of&lt;...&gt;</tt> can be instantiated and simply may not have
a typedef "<tt>type</tt>" (--&gt;SFINAE) or instantiating the class template for
some type combinations will be a "hard" compile-time error.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-02-14 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
This issue should be considered resolved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1255">1255</a> and <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1270">1270</a>.  The wish to change <tt>result_of</tt> into a compiler-support
trait was beyond the actual intention of the submitter Sebastian.
</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/lwg-defects.html#1270">1270</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p><i>[
These changes will require compiler support
]</i></p>


<p>
Change X [func.ret]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class&gt; class result_of; // <i>undefined</i>

template&lt;class Fn, class... ArgTypes&gt;
class result_of&lt;Fn(ArgTypes...)&gt; {
public:
  <del>typedef</del> <i>see below</i> <del>type;</del>
};
</pre>

<p><del>
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>
respectivly, 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>

<p>
<ins>The class template <tt>result_of</tt> shall meet the requirements of a
<i>TransformationTrait</i>: Given the types <tt>Fn</tt>, <tt>T1</tt>, <tt>T2</tt>, ..., <tt>TN</tt> every
template specialization <tt>result_of&lt;Fn(T1,T2,...,TN)&gt;</tt> shall define the
member typedef type equivalent to <tt>decltype(<i>RE</i>)</tt> if and only if
the expression <tt><i>RE</i></tt>
</ins></p>

<blockquote><pre><ins>
value&lt;Fn&gt;() ( value&lt;T1&gt;(), value&lt;T2&gt;(), ... value&lt;TN&gt;()  )
</ins></pre></blockquote>

<p><ins>
would be well-formed. Otherwise, there shall be no member typedef
<tt>type</tt> defined.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
 
<p><i>[
The <tt>value&lt;&gt;</tt> helper function is a utility Daniel Kr�gler
proposed in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2958.html">N2958</a>.
]</i></p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1226"></a>1226. Incomplete changes of #890</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.2 [futures.errors] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-05 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Defect issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#890">890</a> overlooked to adapt the <tt>future_category</tt> from
30.6.1 [futures.overview] and 30.6.2 [futures.errors]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>extern const error_category* const future_category;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
which should be similarly transformed into function form.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10-27 Howard:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-11 Daniel adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
I just observe that the proposed resolution of this issue
is incomplete and needs to reworded. The problem is that the
corresponding declarations
</p>

<blockquote><pre>constexpr error_code make_error_code(future_errc e);
constexpr error_condition make_error_condition(future_errc e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
as constexpr functions are incompatible to the requirements of constexpr
functions given their specified implementation. Note that the incompatibility
is <em>not</em> a result of the modifications proposed by the issue resolution,
but already existed within the
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a>
state where we have
</p>

<blockquote><pre>extern const error_category* const future_category;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
combined with
</p>

<blockquote><pre>constexpr error_code make_error_code(future_errc e);
</pre>
<blockquote>
3 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_code(static_cast&lt;int&gt;(e), *future_category)</tt>.
</blockquote>

<pre>constexpr error_code make_error_condition(future_errc e);
</pre>
<blockquote>
4 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_condition(static_cast&lt;int&gt;(e), *future_category)</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Neither is any of the constructors of <tt>error_code</tt> and <tt>error_condition</tt>
constexpr, nor does the expression <tt>*future_category</tt> satisfy the
requirements for a constant expression (5.19 [expr.const]/2 bullet 6 in
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a>).
</p>

<p>
The simple solution is just to remove the constexpr qualifiers for both
functions, which makes sense, because none of the remaining <tt>make_error_*</tt>
overloads in the library is constexpr. One might consider to realize that
those <tt>make_*</tt> functions could satisfy the constexpr requirements, but this
looks not like an easy task to me, because it would need to rely on a not
yet existing language feature. If such a change is wanted, a new issue
should be opened after the language extension approval (if at all) [1].
</p>

<p>
If no-one complaints I would like to ask Howard to add the following
modifications to this issue, alternatively a new issue could be opened but I
don't know what the best solution is that would cause as little overhead
as possible.
</p>
<p>
What-ever the route is, the following is my proposed resolution for this issue
interaction part of the story:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
In 30.6.1 [futures.overview]/1, Header <tt>&lt;future&gt;</tt> synopsis <em>and</em>
in 30.6.2 [futures.errors]/3+4
change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>constexpr</del> error_code make_error_code(future_errc e);
<del>constexpr</del> error_condition make_error_condition(future_errc e);
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
[1] Let me add that we have a related  NAD issue here: <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#832">832</a>
so the chances for realization are little IMO.
</p>

<p><i>[
Howard: I've updated the proposed wording as Daniel suggests and set to Review.
]</i></p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-13 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Change in 30.6.1 [futures.overview], header <tt>&lt;future&gt;</tt> synopsis:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>extern</del> const error_category<ins>&amp;</ins><del>* const</del> future_category<ins>()</ins>;
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
In 30.6.1 [futures.overview]/1, Header <tt>&lt;future&gt;</tt> synopsis 
change as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>constexpr</del> error_code make_error_code(future_errc e);
<del>constexpr</del> error_condition make_error_condition(future_errc e);
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Change in 30.6.2 [futures.errors]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>extern</del> const error_category<ins>&amp;</ins><del>* const</del> future_category<ins>()</ins>;
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
<del>1- <tt>future_category</tt> shall point to a statically initialized object
of a type derived from class <tt>error_category</tt>.</del>
</p>
<p>
<ins>1- <i>Returns:</i> A reference to an object of a type
derived from class <tt>error_category</tt>.</ins>
</p>
</blockquote>

<pre><del>constexpr</del> error_code make_error_code(future_errc e);
</pre>

<blockquote>
3 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_code(static_cast&lt;int&gt;(e),
<del>*</del>future_category<ins>()</ins>)</tt>.
</blockquote>

<pre><del>constexpr</del> error_<del>code</del><ins>condition</ins> make_error_condition(future_errc e);
</pre>

<blockquote>
4 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>error_condition(static_cast&lt;int&gt;(e),
<del>*</del>future_category<ins>()</ins>)</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1228"></a>1228. User-specialized nothrow type traits</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-07 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to p1 20.7.2 [meta.type.synop]:
</p>

<blockquote>
The behavior of a program that adds specializations for any of the class
templates defined in this subclause is undefined unless otherwise
specified.
</blockquote>

<p>
I believe we should 'otherwise specify' for the nothrow traits, are
these are exactly the use cases where the end user actually has more
information than the compiler.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Open.  Definitely need to give the users the ability to ensure
that the traits give the right answers. Unsure we want to give them the
ability to say this in more than one way. Believes the noexcept proposal
already gives this.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD, rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
We believe the solution offered by
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3050.html">N3050</a>
is superior.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the following comment:
</p>

<blockquote>
user specialization permitted to derive from <tt>std::true_type</tt> when the
operation is known not to throw.
</blockquote>

<p>
to the following traits in 20.7.4.3 [meta.unary.prop] Table 43 Type
property predicates.
</p>

<p><i>[
This may require a new Comments column
]</i></p>


<blockquote><pre>has_nothrow_default_constructor
has_nothrow_copy_constructor
has_nothrow_assign
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1229"></a>1229. <tt>error_code operator=</tt> typo</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Stephan T. Lavavej <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-08 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2960.pdf">N2960</a>
19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview] and 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers] say:
</p>

<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;class ErrorCodeEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_code_enum&lt;ErrorCodeEnum&gt;::value&gt;::type&amp;
    operator=(ErrorCodeEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
They should say:
</p>

<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;class ErrorCodeEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_code_enum&lt;ErrorCodeEnum&gt;::value, error_code&gt;::type&amp;
    operator=(ErrorCodeEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Or (I prefer this form):
</p>
 
<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;class ErrorCodeEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_code_enum&lt;ErrorCodeEnum&gt;::value, error_code&amp;&gt;::type
    operator=(ErrorCodeEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This is because <tt>enable_if</tt> is declared as (20.7.7.6 [meta.trans.other]):
</p>
 
<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;bool B, class T = void&gt; struct enable_if;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
So, the current wording makes <tt>operator=</tt> return
<tt>void&amp;</tt>, which is not good.
</p>

<p> 
19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers]/4 says
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>.
</blockquote>
<p>
which is correct.
</p>

<p>
Additionally,
</p>

<p>
19.5.3.1 [syserr.errcondition.overview]/1 says:
</p>
 
<blockquote><pre> 
template&lt;typename ErrorConditionEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_condition_enum&lt;ErrorConditionEnum&gt;, error_code&gt;::type &amp;
    operator=( ErrorConditionEnum e );
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Which contains several problems (<tt>typename</tt> versus <tt>class</tt>
inconsistency, lack of <tt>::value</tt>, <tt>error_code</tt> instead of
<tt>error_condition</tt>), while 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers] says:
</p>
 
<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;class ErrorConditionEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_condition_enum&lt;ErrorConditionEnum&gt;::value&gt;::type&amp;
    operator=(ErrorConditionEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Which returns <tt>void&amp;</tt>.  They should both say:
</p>
 
<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;class ErrorConditionEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_condition_enum&lt;ErrorConditionEnum&gt;::value, error_condition&gt;::type&amp;
    operator=(ErrorConditionEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Or (again, I prefer this form):
</p>

<blockquote><pre> 
template &lt;class ErrorConditionEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_condition_enum&lt;ErrorConditionEnum&gt;::value, error_condition&amp;&gt;::type
    operator=(ErrorConditionEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Additionally, 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers] lacks a
"<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>." paragraph, which is presumably
necessary.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10-18 Beman adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
The proposed resolution for issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1237">1237</a> makes this issue
moot, so it should become NAD.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD, solved by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1237">1237</a>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p>
Change 19.5.2.1 [syserr.errcode.overview] and 19.5.2.3 [syserr.errcode.modifiers]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class ErrorCodeEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_code_enum&lt;ErrorCodeEnum&gt;::value<ins>, error_code&amp;</ins>&gt;::type<del>&amp;</del>
    operator=(ErrorCodeEnum e);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.3.1 [syserr.errcondition.overview]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;<del>typename</del> <ins>class</ins> ErrorConditionEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_condition_enum&lt;ErrorConditionEnum&gt;<ins>::value</ins>, error_co<ins>ndition</ins><del>de</del><ins>&amp;</ins>&gt;::type<del> &amp;</del>
    operator=( ErrorConditionEnum e );
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Change 19.5.3.3 [syserr.errcondition.modifiers]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class ErrorConditionEnum&gt;
  typename enable_if&lt;is_error_condition_enum&lt;ErrorConditionEnum&gt;::value<ins>, error_condition&amp;</ins>&gt;::type<del>&amp;</del>
    operator=(ErrorConditionEnum e);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>*this == make_error_condition(e)</tt>.
</p>
<p><ins>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>.
</ins></p>
<p>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1230"></a>1230. <tt>mem_fn</tt> and variadic templates</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-09 <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#920">920</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>



<p>
Since we have removed the entry in B [implimits] for the
library-specific limit for number of arguments passed to
<tt>function</tt>/<tt>tuple</tt>/etc. I believe we need to update the
spec for <tt>mem_fn</tt> to reflect this.
</p>

<p>
The "<i>Remarks:</i> Implementations may implement <tt>mem_fn</tt> as a set of
overloaded function templates." no longer holds, as we cannot create an
arbitrary number of such overloads.  I believe we should strike the
remark and add a second signature:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class R, class T, typename ... ArgTypes&gt;
  unspecified mem_fn(R (T::*pm)(ArgTypes...));
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
I believe we need two signatures as pointer-to-data-member and
pointer-to-member-function-taking-no-args appear to use subtly different
syntax.
</p>

<p><i>[
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#920">920</a> as a similar proposed resolution.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Add to 20.8 [function.objects] and 20.8.13 [func.memfn]:


<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class R, class T&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R T::* pm)

<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...));</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile);</ins>

<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...)&amp;);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const&amp;);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile&amp;);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile&amp;);</ins>

<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...)&amp;&amp;);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const&amp;&amp;);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) volatile&amp;&amp;);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class R, class T, class ...Args&gt; <i>unspecified</i> mem_fn(R (T::* pm)(Args...) const volatile&amp;&amp;);</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Strike 20.8.13 [func.memfn], p5:
</p>

<blockquote>
<del><i>Remarks:</i> Implementations may implement <tt>mem_fn</tt> as a set
of overloaded function templates.</del>
</blockquote>




<hr>
<h3><a name="1232"></a>1232. Still <tt>swap</tt>'s with rvalue-references</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-11 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The current library contains still rvalue reference-swaps that seem to be
overlooked in the process of switching back to lvalue-ref swaps.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Editor accepts as NAD Editorial.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Change 20.3.5 [pairs]/1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T1, class T2&gt;
struct pair {
  ...
  void swap(pair&amp;<del>&amp;</del> p);
};
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.3.5 [pairs] before p. 17 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(pair&amp;<del>&amp;</del> p);
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>

<p>
Change 20.3.5 [pairs] before p. 21 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class T1, class T2&gt; void swap(pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp; x, pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template&lt;class T1, class T2&gt; void swap(pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp;&amp; x, pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp; y);</del>
<del>template&lt;class T1, class T2&gt; void swap(pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp; x, pair&lt;T1, T2&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.4.1 [tuple.general]/2, header <tt>&lt;tuple&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.5.2.9, specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class... Types&gt;
void swap(tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp; x, tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class... Types&gt;
void swap(tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp;&amp; x, tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class... Types&gt;
void swap(tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp; x, tuple&lt;Types...&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.4.2 [tuple.tuple] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.5.2.3, tuple swap
void swap(tuple&amp;<del>&amp;</del>)
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.4.2.3 [tuple.swap] before 1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(tuple&amp;<del>&amp;</del> rhs);
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.8 [function.objects]/2, header <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;);
<del>template&lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;&amp;, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;);
template&lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&amp;&amp;);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.8.14.2 [func.wrap.func], as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.7.15.2.2, function modifiers:
void swap(function&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
template&lt;class F, class A&gt; void assign(F, const A&amp;);

[..]

// 20.7.15.2.7, specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;);
<del>template &lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;&amp;, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;);
template &lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;&amp;);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.8.14.2.7 [func.wrap.func.alg] before 1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp; f1, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp; f2);
<del>template&lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;&amp; f1, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp; f2);
template&lt;class R, class... ArgTypes&gt;
void swap(function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp; f1, function&lt;R(ArgTypes...)&gt;&amp;&amp; f2);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 20.9.10.2 [util.smartptr.shared]/1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.8.12.2.4, modifiers:
void swap(shared_ptr&amp;<del>&amp;</del> r);

[..]

// 20.8.12.2.9, shared_ptr specialized algorithms:
template&lt;class T&gt; void swap(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;&amp; a, shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;&amp; b);
<del>template&lt;class T&gt; void swap(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;&amp;&amp; a, shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;&amp; b);
template&lt;class T&gt; void swap(shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;&amp; a, shared_ptr&lt;T&gt;&amp;&amp; b);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 21.3 [string.classes]/1, header <tt>&lt;string&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 21.4.8.8: swap
template&lt;class charT, class traits, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; lhs, basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; rhs);
<del>template&lt;class charT, class traits, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; lhs, basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; rhs);
template&lt;class charT, class traits, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp; lhs, basic_string&lt;charT,traits,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; rhs);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3 [sequences]/1, header <tt>&lt;deque&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3 [sequences]/1, header <tt>&lt;list&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3 [sequences]/1, header <tt>&lt;queue&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>

template &lt;class T, class Container = vector&lt;T&gt;, class Compare = less&lt;typename Container::value_type&gt; &gt;
class priority_queue;
template &lt;class T, class Container, class Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container, class Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container, class Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3 [sequences]/1, header <tt>&lt;stack&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; x, stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3 [sequences]/1, header <tt>&lt;vector&gt;</tt> synopsis, as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3.2 [deque]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(const_iterator position);
iterator erase(const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
void clear();

[..]

// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3.2.4 [deque.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, deque&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3.3 [forwardlist]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase_after(const_iterator position);
iterator erase_after(const_iterator position, iterator last);
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);

[..]

// 23.3.3.6 specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3.3.6 [forwardlist.spec] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, forward_list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3.4 [list]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(const_iterator position);
iterator erase(const_iterator position, const_iterator last);
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
void clear();

[..]

// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.3.4.5 [list.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, list&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.5.1.1 [queue.defn] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(queue&amp;<del>&amp;</del> q) { c.swap(q.c); }

[..]

template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.5.1.5 [queue.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, queue&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.5.2 [priority.queue]/1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(priority_queue&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);

// no equality is provided
template &lt;class T, class Container, class Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container, class Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container, class Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.5.2.4 [priqueue.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Container, Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container, Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container, Compare&gt;
void swap(priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp; x, priority_queue&lt;T, Container, Compare&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.5.3.1 [stack.defn] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(stack&amp;<del>&amp;</del> s) { c.swap(s.c); }

[..]

template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, stack&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, stack&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, stack&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>


</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.5.3.5 [stack.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; x, stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Container&gt;
void swap(stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp; x, stack&lt;T, Container&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.4.1 [vector]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
void clear();

[..]

// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity] before p. 8 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del> x);
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.4.1.5 [vector.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class T, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, vector&lt;T,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.4.2 [vector.bool]/1 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
void swap(vector&lt;bool,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
static void swap(reference x, reference y);
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6 [associative]/1, header <tt>&lt;map&gt;</tt> synopsis as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>

[..]

template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6 [associative]/1, header <tt>&lt;set&gt;</tt> synopsis as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(set&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, set&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(set&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, set&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>

[..]

template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.1 [map]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
void clear();

[..]

// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.1.5 [map.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, map&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.2 [multimap]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
void clear();

[..]

// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.2.4 [multimap.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multimap&lt;Key,T,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.3 [set]/2 and 23.6.3.2 [set.special] as indicated: (twice!)
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, set&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.4 [multiset]/2 as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>iterator erase(const_iterator first, const_iterator last);
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;<del>&amp;</del>);
void clear();

[..]

// specialized algorithms:
template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&amp;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>

<li>
<p>
Change 23.6.4.2 [multiset.special] as indicated:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
<del>template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; y);
template &lt;class Key, class Compare, class Allocator&gt;
void swap(multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp; x, multiset&lt;Key,Compare,Allocator&gt;&amp;&amp; y);</del>
</pre></blockquote>

</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1233"></a>1233. Missing <tt>unique_ptr</tt> signatures in synopsis</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-11 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#296">296</a>.  Some <tt>unique_ptr</tt> signatures are missing
from the synopsis in 20.9 [memory].
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-04 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD Editorial.  The editor has adopted the fix.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add in 20.9 [memory], Header <tt>&lt;memory&gt;</tt> synopsis
missing declarations as shown below:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.8.11 Class unique_ptr:
template &lt;class X&gt; class default_delete;
<ins>template&lt;class T&gt; struct default_delete&lt;T[]&gt;;</ins>
template &lt;class X, class D = default_delete&lt;T&gt;&gt; class unique_ptr;
<ins>template&lt;class T, class D&gt; class unique_ptr&lt;T[], D&gt;;</ins>

<ins>template&lt;class T, class D&gt; void swap(unique_ptr&lt;T, D&gt;&amp; x, unique_ptr&lt;T, D&gt;&amp; y);</ins>

<ins>template&lt;class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2&gt;
bool operator==(const unique_ptr&lt;T1, D1&gt;&amp; x, const unique_ptr&lt;T2, D2&gt;&amp; y);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2&gt;
bool operator!=(const unique_ptr&lt;T1, D1&gt;&amp; x, const unique_ptr&lt;T2, D2&gt;&amp; y);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2&gt;
bool operator&lt;(const unique_ptr&lt;T1, D1&gt;&amp; x, const unique_ptr&lt;T2, D2&gt;&amp; y);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2&gt;
bool operator&lt;=(const unique_ptr&lt;T1, D1&gt;&amp; x, const unique_ptr&lt;T2, D2&gt;&amp; y);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2&gt;
bool operator&gt;(const unique_ptr&lt;T1, D1&gt;&amp; x, const unique_ptr&lt;T2, D2&gt;&amp; y);</ins>
<ins>template&lt;class T1, class D1, class T2, class D2&gt;
bool operator&gt;=(const unique_ptr&lt;T1, D1&gt;&amp; x, const unique_ptr&lt;T2, D2&gt;&amp; y);</ins>
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1235"></a>1235. Issue with C++0x random number proposal</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> X [rand.concept.dist] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Matthias Troyer <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-12 <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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
There exist optimized, vectorized vendor libraries for the creation of
random number generators, such as Intel's MKL [1] and AMD's ACML [2]. In
timing tests we have seen a performance gain of a factor of up to 80
(eighty) compared to a pure C++ implementation (in Boost.Random) when
using these generator to generate a sequence of normally distributed
random numbers. In codes dominated by the generation of random numbers
(we have application codes where random number generation is more than
50% of the CPU time) this factor 80 is very significant.
</p>

<p>
To make use of these vectorized generators, we use a C++ class modeling
the <tt>RandomNumberEngine</tt> concept and forwarding the generation of random
numbers to those optimized generators. For example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace mkl {
 class mt19937 {.... };
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
For the generation of random variates we also want to dispatch to
optimized vectorized functions in the MKL or ACML libraries. See this
example:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>mkl::mt19937 eng;
std::normal_distribution&lt;double&gt; dist;

double n = dist(eng);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Since the variate generation is done through the <tt>operator()</tt> of the
distribution there is no customization point to dispatch to Intel's or
AMD's optimized functions to generate normally distributed numbers based
on the <tt>mt19937</tt> generator. Hence, the performance gain of 80 cannot be
achieved.
</p>

<p>
Contrast this with TR1:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>mkl::mt19937 eng;
std::tr1::normal_distribution&lt;double&gt; dist;
std::tr1::variate_generator&lt;mkl::mt19937,std::tr1::normal_distribution&lt;double&gt; &gt; rng(eng,dist);
double n = rng();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This - admittedly much uglier from an aestethic point of view - design
allowed optimization by specializing the <tt>variate_generator</tt> template for
<tt>mkl::mt19937</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std { namespace tr1 {

template&lt;&gt;
class variate_generator&lt;mkl::mt19937,std::tr1::normal_distribution&lt;double&gt; &gt; { .... };

} }
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
A similar customization point is missing in the C++0x design and
prevents the optimized vectorized version to be used.
</p>

<p>
Suggested resolution:
</p>

<p>
Add a customization point to the distribution concept. Instead of the
<tt>variate_generator</tt> template this can be done through a call to a
free function <tt>generate_variate</tt> found by ADL instead of
<tt>operator()</tt> of the distribution:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;RandomNumberDistribution, class RandomNumberEngine&gt;
typename RandomNumberDistribution ::result_type
generate_variate(RandomNumberDistribution const&amp; dist, RandomNumberEngine&amp; eng);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This function can be overloaded for optimized enginges like
<tt>mkl::mt19937</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
NAD Future.  No time to add this feature for C++0X.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1236"></a>1236. reserved identifiers in programs not using 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sean Hunt <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-13 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I wasn't sure whether to consider this a library or a language issue,
because the issue is I think it's incorrectly categorized as being part
of the library, so I thought I'd send a message to both of you and let
you sort it out.
</p>

<p>
Most reserved identifiers are treated as unilaterally available to the
implementation, such as to implement language extensions, or provide
macros documenting its functionality. However, the requirements for
reserved identifers are in 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names], which are a
subsection of 17.6.3 [constraints]. 17.6.3.1 [constraints.overview] appears only to apply to "C++ programs
that use the facilities of the C++ standard library", meaning that, in
theory, all implementations are erroneous in having any non-standard
identifiers predefined for programs that do not, at some point, include
a standard library header.
</p>

<p>
Furthermore, it's unclear whether the use of certain identifiers is UB
or results in an ill-formed program. In particular, 17.6.3.3.1 [macro.names] uses a "shall not", where 17.6.3.3.2 [global.names] says that names are "reserved to the
implementation". 17.6.3.3 [reserved.names] seems only to cover the
instance of a name being described as "reserved", so are implementations
required to diagnose a program that performs, as an example, "<tt>#undef
get</tt>"?
</p>

<p><i>[
2009 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Move to NAD. There may in theory be multiple interpretations possible,
but there's no evidence that this causes any genuine problems or
uncertainty about what implementations are allowed to do. We do not
believe this rises to the level of a defect.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1238"></a>1238. defining algorithms taking iterator for range</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-15 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The library has many algorithms that take a source range represented by
a pair of iterators, and the start of some second sequence given by a
single iterator.  Internally, these algorithms will produce undefined
behaviour if the second 'range' is not as large as the input range, but
none of the algorithms spell this out in Requires clauses, and there is
no catch-all wording to cover this in clause 17 or the front matter of
25.
</p>

<p>
There was an attempt to provide such wording in paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2944.pdf">n2944</a>
but this
seems incidental to the focus of the paper, and getting the wording of
this issue right seems substantially more difficult than the simple
approach taken in that paper.  Such wording will be removed from an
updated paper, and hopefully tracked via the LWG issues list instead.
</p>

<p>
It seems there are several classes of problems here and finding wording
to solve all in one paragraph could be too much.  I suspect we need
several overlapping requirements that should cover the desired range of
behaviours.
</p>

<p>
Motivating examples:
</p>

<p>
A good initial example is the <tt>swap_ranges</tt> algorithm.  Here there is a
clear requirement that <tt>first2</tt> refers to the start of a valid range at
least as long as the range <tt>[first1, last1)</tt>.  <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2944.pdf">n2944</a> tries to solve this
by positing a hypothetical <tt>last2</tt> iterator that is implied by the
signature, and requires <tt>distance(first2,last2) &lt; distance(first1,last1)</tt>.
 This mostly works, although I am uncomfortable assuming that <tt>last2</tt> is
clearly defined and well known without any description of how to obtain
it (and I have no idea how to write that).
</p>

<p>
A second motivating example might be the <tt>copy</tt> algorithm.  Specifically,
let us image a call like:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>copy(istream_iterator&lt;int&gt;(is),istream_iterator(),ostream_iterator&lt;int&gt;(os));
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
In this case, our input iterators are literally simple <tt>InputIterators</tt>,
and the destination is a simple <tt>OutputIterator</tt>.  In neither case am I
happy referring to <tt>std::distance</tt>, in fact it is not possible for the
<tt>ostream_iterator</tt> at all as it does not meet the requirements.  However,
any wording we provide must cover both cases.  Perhaps we might deduce
<tt>last2 == ostream_iterator&lt;int&gt;{}</tt>, but that might not always be valid for
user-defined iterator types.  I can well imagine an 'infinite range'
that writes to <tt>/dev/null</tt> and has no meaningful <tt>last2</tt>.
</p>

<p>
The motivating example in <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2944.pdf">n2944</a> is <tt>std::equal</tt>, and that seems to fall somewhere between the
two.
</p>

<p>
Outlying examples might be <tt>partition_copy</tt> that takes two output
iterators, and the <tt>_n</tt> algorithms where a range is specified by a
specific number of iterations, rather than traditional iterator pair. 
We should also <em>not</em> accidentally apply inappropriate constraints to
<tt>std::rotate</tt> which takes a third iterator that is not intended to be a
separate range at all.
</p>

<p>
I suspect we want some wording similar to:
</p>

<blockquote>
For algorithms that operate on ranges where the end iterator of the
second range is not specified, the second range shall contain at least
as many elements as the first.
</blockquote>

<p>
I don't think this quite captures the intent yet though.  I am not sure
if 'range' is the right term here rather than sequence.  More awkwardly,
I am not convinced we can describe an Output sequence such as produce by
an <tt>ostream_iterator</tt> as "containing elements", at least not as a
precondition to the call before they have been written.
</p>

<p>
Another idea was to describe require that the trailing iterator support
at least distance(input range) applications of <tt>operator++</tt> and may be
written through the same number of times if a mutable/output iterator.
</p>

<p>
We might also consider handling the case of an output range vs. an input
range in separate paragraphs, if that simplifies how we describe some of
these constraints.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-03 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD Future after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Does not have sufficient support at this time. May wish to reconsider for a
future standard.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1239"></a>1239. Defect report</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-16 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Table 43 defines a number of traits that yield true for arrays of class
types with the trait's property, but not arrays of other types with that
property.  For example, <tt>has_trivial_default_constructor</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote>
<tt>T</tt> is a trivial type (3.9) or a class type with a trivial default
constructor (12.1) or an array of such a class type.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 post-Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
An array of a trivial type is a trivial type.
</p>
<p>
Mark as Tentatively NAD Editorial. The wording is OK as is,
since an array of a trivial type is a trivial type, but the wording as
proposed might be clearer.
</p>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The wording is OK as is, since an array of a trivial type is a trivial type.
Project editor may wish to accept the suggested wording as editorial.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change all the traits in question following this pattern:
</p>

<blockquote>
<tt>T</tt> is a trivial type (3.9) or a class type with a trivial default
 constructor (12.1)<ins>,</ins> or an array of such a <del>class</del> type.
</blockquote>

<p>
i.e., add a comma and delete a "class."
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1242"></a>1242. Enable SCARY iterators</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23 [containers] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-21 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
See
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2980.pdf">N2980</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1243"></a>1243. Missing <tt>operator+= (initializer_list&lt;T&gt;)</tt> for <tt>valarray</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 26.6.2.6 [valarray.cassign] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <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#valarray.cassign">issues</a> in [valarray.cassign].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP 64</b></p>

<p>
During the additions of <tt>initializer_list</tt> overloads
<tt>basic_string</tt> added
</p>

<blockquote><pre>basic_string&amp; operator+=(initializer_list&lt;charT&gt;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
but
</p>

<blockquote><pre>valarray&lt;T&gt;&amp; operator+= (initializer_list&lt;T&gt;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
was not defined.
</p>

<p><i>[
Daniel adds on opening:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Recommend NAD. The <tt>operator+=</tt> overload of <tt>basic_string</tt>
behaves as-if calling <tt>append</tt>, which is completely different in
meaning as the existing <tt>operator+=</tt> overloads in
<tt>valarray</tt> which just sum the value or values to the existing
elements. The suggestion to add a corresponding append function to
<tt>valarray</tt> was not considered as appropriate and the request was
withdrawn (c++std-lib-24968).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-10 Santa Cruz:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Mark as NAD.  Request has been withdrawn by NB.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to 26.6.2.6 [valarray.cassign]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>valarray&lt;T&gt;&amp; operator+= (initializer_list&lt;T&gt;);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1244"></a>1244. wait_*() in *future for synchronous 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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Detlef Vollmann <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
With the addition of <tt>async()</tt>, a <tt>future</tt> might be
associated with a function that is not running in a different thread but
is stored to by run synchronously on the <tt>get()</tt> call. It's not
clear what the <tt>wait()</tt> functions should do in this case.
</p>

<p>
Suggested resolution:
</p>

<p>
Throw an exception.
</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1246"></a>1246. <tt>vector::resize()</tt> missing efficiency guarantee</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> David Abrahams <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
If <tt>v</tt> is a <tt>vector</tt>, I think repeated calls to
<tt>v.resize( v.size() + 1 )</tt> should be amortized O(1), but it's not
clear that's true from the text of the standard:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>sz &lt; size()</tt>, equivalent to <tt>erase(begin() + sz, end());</tt>. If
<tt>size() &lt; sz</tt>, appends <tt>sz - size()</tt> default constructed elements to the
sequence.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
Seems to me if we used <tt>push_back</tt> instead of appends, we might be giving
the guarantee I'd like.  Thoughts?
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-10 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.  Rationale added
below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 23.4.1.2 [vector.capacity]/10, change
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void resize(size_type sz);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> If <tt>sz &lt; size()</tt>, equivalent to <tt>erase(begin() + sz, end());</tt>. If
<tt>size() &lt; sz</tt>, <del>appends <tt>sz - size()</tt> default constructed elements to the
sequence</del>
<ins>equivalent to <tt>sz - size()</tt> consecutive evaluations of <tt>push_back(T())</tt></ins>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The description in terms of <tt>push_back</tt> led some to believe that
one could expect the exact same growth pattern from both <tt>resize</tt> and
<tt>push_back</tt> (e.g.) which could lead to sub-optimal implementations.
Additionally, 23.4.1 [vector], p1 includes a statement that this container
"supports (amortized) constant time insert and erase operations at the end;",
therefore addressing the concern of this issue.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1248"></a>1248. Equality comparison for 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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Herb Sutter <b>Opened:</b> 2009-10-25 <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">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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
See
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2986.pdf">N2986</a>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-01-22 Alisdair Opens.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-01-24 Alisdair provides wording.
]</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/n3068.pdf">N3068</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Apply paper
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2986.pdf">N2986</a>.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1251"></a>1251. move constructing <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt></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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I just came across issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a> -- Global permission to move, which
seems to address the concern raised by the example in c++std-lib-25030.
</p>
<p>
IIUC, the example violates the permission to assume that arguments
bound to rvalue references are unnamed temporaries granted to
implementations by the resolution of issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1204">1204</a> - Global permission
to move.
</p>

<p>
I.e., the <tt>ostringstream(ostringstream &amp;&amp;rhs)</tt> ctor can leave the <tt>rhs</tt>
pointers pointing to the newly constructed object's buffer just as
long as the dtor doesn't change or invalidate the buffer. The caller
may not make any assumptions about rhs after the move beyond it being
safe to destroy or reassign.
</p>

<p>
So unless I misunderstood something, I still think the <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt>
move ctor is overspecified. Specifically, I think the third sentence
in the Effects clause and the last 6 bullets in the Postconditions
clause can, and IMO should, be stricken.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-01-31 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The sense of 1251 appears to be that the <tt>basic_stringbuf</tt> move
constructor offers more guarantees than the minimum.  This is true, and quite
correct.  The additional words guarantee that the internal buffer has genuinely
transferred from one object to another, and further operations on the original
will not affect the buffer of the newly created object.  This is a very
important guarantee, much as we see that a moved-from <tt>unique_ptr</tt> is
guaranteed to be empty.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Strike from 27.8.1.1 [stringbuf.cons]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>basic_stringbuf(basic_stringbuf&amp;&amp; rhs);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Move constructs from the rvalue <tt>rhs</tt>. It is
implementation-defined whether the sequence pointers in <tt>*this</tt>
(<tt>eback()</tt>, <tt>gptr()</tt>, <tt>egptr()</tt>, <tt>pbase()</tt>,
<tt>pptr()</tt>, <tt>epptr()</tt>) obtain the values which <tt>rhs</tt>
had. <del>Whether they do or not, <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>rhs</tt> reference
separate buffers (if any at all) after the construction.</del> The openmode,
locale and any other state of <tt>rhs</tt> is also copied.
</p>

<p>
<i>Postconditions:</i> Let <tt>rhs_p</tt> refer to the state of
<tt>rhs</tt> just prior to this construction and let <tt>rhs_a</tt>
referto the state of <tt>rhs</tt> just after this construction.
</p>
<ul>
<li>
<tt>str() == rhs_p.str()</tt>
</li>
<li>
<tt>gptr() - eback() == rhs_p.gptr() - rhs_p.eback()</tt>
</li>
<li>
<tt>egptr() - eback() == rhs_p.egptr() - rhs_p.eback()</tt>
</li>
<li>
<tt>pptr() - pbase() == rhs_p.pptr() - rhs_p.pbase()</tt>
</li>
<li>
<tt>epptr() - pbase() == rhs_p.epptr() - rhs_p.pbase()</tt>
</li>
<li><del>
if <tt>(eback()) eback() != rhs_a.eback()</tt>
</del></li>
<li><del>
if <tt>(gptr()) gptr() != rhs_a.gptr()</tt>
</del></li>
<li><del>
if <tt>(egptr()) egptr() != rhs_a.egptr()</tt>
</del></li>
<li><del>
if <tt>(pbase()) pbase() != rhs_a.pbase()</tt>
</del></li>
<li><del>
if <tt>(pptr()) pptr() != rhs_a.pptr()</tt>
</del></li>
<li><del>
if <tt>(epptr()) epptr() != rhs_a.epptr()</tt>
</del></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1259"></a>1259. Should initializer-list constructors move elements?</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sean Hunt <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-05 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to 23.2.3 [sequence.reqmts], <tt>X(il)</tt> is
equivalent to <tt>X(il.begin(), il.end())</tt>. Should it instead be
equivalent to <tt>X(move_iterator(il.begin()),
move_iterator(il.end()))</tt> so that needless copies are not made? This
doesn't seem ideal either - it may make more sense to provide two
overloads for the constructor, one for move and one for copy.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-11-10 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
I've moved this issue to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib,
and added a rationale below.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
</p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
There is no consensus at this time within EWG or CWG to make the
required language changes.  Therefore this is not something that the LWG
can even consider.  Should such language changes be made for a future
standard, no doubt there would need to be an accompanying library impact
survey.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1263"></a>1263. missing <tt>swap</tt> overloads for <tt>regex</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 28.4 [re.syn] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Howard Hinnant <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-12 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses: UK 314</b></p>

<p>
In Message c++std-lib-25529, Alisdair writes:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3009.html#UK314">UK comment 314</a>
requests rvalue swap overloads in a couple of places they
were missed.
</p>

<p>
We have in general reverted to the single swap signature taking lvalue
references, which could be seen as the alternative solution to
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3009.html#UK314">UK 314</a>,
bringing consistency to the standard &lt;g&gt;
</p>

<p>
Either way, I no longer expect to see any work to resolve this comment -
the work is complete and it should be either marked Rejected, or
Accepted with Modifications (namely, removing all other rvalue swaps!)
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
We have in general reverted to the single swap signature taking
lvalue references, which could be seen as the alternative solution to
UK 314, bringing consistency to the standard.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1265"></a>1265. <tt>longjmp</tt> 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sean Hunt <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-16 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
18.10 [support.runtime]/4 says that <tt>longjmp</tt> is undefined if
unwinding by the mechanism used by catch and throw would invoke any nontrivial
destructors. However, the text as written is rather vague, in particular when
dealing with <tt>catch(...)</tt>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void foo() {
  jump_buf buf;
  non_trivial_dtor n1; // 1
  if (!setjmp(buf)) {
    non_trivial_dtor n2; // 2
    try {
      longjmp(buf, 1);
    } catch (...) {
    }
  }
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
My interpretation of the meaning of 18.10 [support.runtime]/4 is that
declaration 2, but not 1, would cause the <tt>longjmp</tt> to be undefined
behavior. However,  it's not entirely clear from the text. Arguably, replacing
the <tt>setjmp</tt> and <tt>longjmp</tt> with <tt>catch</tt> would still cause
the destructor for <tt>n1</tt> to be called after the unwinding, which would
lead to undefined behavior. This is clearly not an intended consequence of the
wording. However, it is probably still UB, as <tt>n1</tt> now has
"indeterminate" value, and running its destructor on <tt>foo</tt>'s exit will
cause Bad Things.
</p>

<p>
Declarations 2 has a more interesting issue. The <tt>catch(...)</tt> muddles up
the definition that uses <tt>throw</tt> and <tt>catch</tt> - if
<tt>longjmp()</tt> were indeed a <tt>throw</tt>, control would never return to
the <tt>setjmp</tt>. As such, <tt>n2</tt>'s destructor wouldn't be called
(except by the argument for <tt>n1</tt>, which is that the destructor would be
called later as the frame was left in the normal control flow).
</p>

<p>
I suggest that paragraph 4 of 18.10 [support.runtime] should be replaced
with the following, or something that reads better but has the same effect:
</p>

<blockquote>
The function signature <tt>longjmp(jmp_buf jbuf, int val)</tt> has more
restricted behavior in this International Standard. A call to <tt>longjmp</tt>
has undefined behavior if any non-trivial destructors would be called were the
<tt>longjmp</tt> call replaced with a throw-expression whose nearest matching
handler were a (possibly imaginary) function-try-block on the function
containing the corresponding <tt>setjmp</tt> call.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2009-11-17 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib. 
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 18.10 [support.runtime]/4:
</p>

<blockquote>
The function signature <tt>longjmp(jmp_buf jbuf, int val)</tt> has more
restricted behavior in this International Standard. <del>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 invoke any non-trivial destructors for any automatic objects.</del>
<ins>A call to <tt>longjmp</tt> has undefined behavior if any non-trivial
destructors would be called were the <tt>longjmp</tt> call replaced with a
throw-expression whose nearest matching handler were a (possibly imaginary)
function-try-block on the function containing the corresponding <tt>setjmp</tt>
call.</ins>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
In the given example, it is clear that it is only <tt>n2</tt> and not
<tt>n1</tt> that is destroyed by the <tt>longjmp</tt>.
</p>
<p>
At this late stage in the standards process, we are focusing on issues that
impact users or implementers.  Trying to rewrite complex wording just for the
sake of improved clarity is likely to do more harm than good.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1266"></a>1266. <tt>shared_future::get</tt> and deferred async functions</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#futures.shared_future">issues</a> in [futures.shared_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
If a <tt>shared_future</tt> is constructed with the result of an <tt>async</tt> call with a
deferred function, and two or more copies of that <tt>shared_future</tt> are created,
with multiple threads calling <tt>get()</tt>, it is not clear which thread runs the
deferred function. 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]p22 from
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a>
says (minus editor's note):
</p>

<blockquote>
<i>Effects:</i> if the associated state contains a deferred function, executes
the deferred function. Otherwise, blocks until the associated state is ready.
</blockquote>

<p>
In the absence of wording to the contrary, this implies that every thread that
calls <tt>wait()</tt> will execute the deferred function.
</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Replace 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]p22 with the following:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> If the associated state 
<del>contains a deferred function, executes the deferred function. Otherwise,
blocks until the associated state is ready.</del>
<ins>was created by a <tt>promise</tt> or <tt>packaged_task</tt> object, block
until the associated state is ready. If the associated state is associated with
a thread created for an <tt>async</tt> call (30.6.9 [futures.async]), as
if <tt>associated-thread.join()</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p><ins>
If the associated state contains a deferred function, calls to <tt>wait()</tt>
on all <tt>shared_future</tt> objects that share the same associated state are
serialized. The first call to <tt>wait()</tt> that shares a given associated
state executes the deferred function and stores the return value or exception in
the associated state.
</ins></p>

<p><ins>
<i>Synchronization:</i> if the associated state was created by a
<tt>promise</tt> object, the completion of <tt>set_value()</tt> or
<tt>set_exception()</tt> to that <tt>promise</tt> happens before (1.10 [intro.multithread]) <tt>wait()</tt> returns. If the associated state
was created by a <tt>packaged_task</tt> object, the completion of the associated
task happens before <tt>wait()</tt> returns. If the associated state is
associated with a thread created for an <tt>async</tt> call (30.6.9 [futures.async]), the completion of the associated thread happens-before
<tt>wait()</tt> returns.
</ins></p>

<p><ins>
If the associated state contained a deferred function, the invocation of the
deferred function happens-before any call to <tt>wait()</tt> on a
<tt>future</tt> that shares that state returns.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1269"></a>1269. Associated state doesn't account for async</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.4 [futures.state] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Anthony Williams <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-18 <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#futures.state">active issues</a> in [futures.state].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.state">issues</a> in [futures.state].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The current description of the associated state in 30.6.4 [futures.state]
does not allow for futures created by an <tt>async</tt> call. The description
therefore needs to be extended to cover that.
</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add a new sentence to 30.6.4 [futures.state] p2:
</p>

<blockquote>
2 This <i>associated state</i> consists of some state information and some
(possibly not yet evaluated) <i>result</i>, which can be a (possibly
<tt>void</tt>) value or an exception. <ins>If the associated state was created
by a call to <tt>async</tt> (30.6.9 [futures.async]) then it may also
contain a deferred function or an associated <tt>thread</tt>.</ins>
</blockquote>

<p>
Add an extra bullet to 30.6.4 [futures.state] p3:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
The result of an associated state can be set by calling:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
<tt>promise::set_value</tt>,
</li>
<li>
<tt>promise::set_exception</tt>, <del>or</del>
</li>
<li>
packaged_task::operator()<del>.</del><ins>, or</ins>
</li>
<li>
<ins>a call to <tt>async</tt> (30.6.9 [futures.async]).</ins>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1272"></a>1272. confusing declarations of <tt>promise::set_value</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-22 <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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The definitions of <tt>promise::set_value</tt> need tidying up, the
synopsis says:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// setting the result
void set_value(const R&amp; r);
void set_value(<i>see below</i>);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Why is the first one there?  It implies it is always present for all
specialisations of promise, which is not true.
</p>

<p>
The definition says:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void set_value(const R&amp; r);
void promise::set_value(R&amp;&amp; r);
void promise&lt;R&amp;&gt;::set_value(R&amp; r);
void promise&lt;void&gt;::set_value();
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The lack of qualification on the first one again implies it's present
for all specialisations, again not true.
</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change the synopsis in 30.6.5 [futures.promise]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// setting the result
<del>void set_value(const R&amp; r);</del>
void set_value(<i>see below</i>);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
And the definition be changed by qualifying the first signature:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void <ins>promise::</ins>set_value(const R&amp; r);
void promise::set_value(R&amp;&amp; r);
void promise&lt;R&amp;&gt;::set_value(R&amp; r);
void promise&lt;void&gt;::set_value();
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1273"></a>1273. <tt>future::valid</tt> should be callable on an invalid future</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-22 <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#futures.unique_future">issues</a> in [futures.unique_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
30.6.6 [futures.unique_future]/3 says:
</p>

<blockquote>
The effect of calling any member function other than the destructor or
the move-assignment operator on a <tt>future</tt> object for which <tt>valid() ==
false</tt> is undefined.
</blockquote>

<p>
This means calling <tt>future::valid()</tt> is undefined unless it will
return <tt>true</tt>, so you can only use it if you know the answer!
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-12-08 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 30.6.6 [futures.unique_future]/3:
</p>

<blockquote>
The effect of calling any member function other than the
destructor<ins>,</ins> or the move-assignment operator<ins>, or
<tt>valid</tt>,</ins> on a <tt>future</tt> object for which <tt>valid()
== false</tt> is undefined.
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1274"></a>1274. <tt>atomic_future</tt> constructor</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-22 <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#futures.atomic_future">issues</a> in [futures.atomic_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future] this constructor:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>atomic_future(future&lt;R&gt;&amp;&amp;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
is declared in the synopsis, but not defined. Instead
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2997.htm">n2997</a>
defines:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>atomic_future(const future&lt;R&gt;&amp;&amp; rhs);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
and
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">n3000</a>
defines
</p>

<blockquote><pre>atomic_future(atomic_future&lt;R&gt;&amp;&amp; rhs);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
both of which are wrong. The constructor definition should be changed
to match the synopsis.
</p>

<p><i>[
2009-12-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Adjust the signature above 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future]/6 like so:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>atomic_future(<del>atomic_</del>future<ins>&lt;R&gt;</ins>&amp;&amp; rhs);
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1275"></a>1275. creating and setting futures</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-11-22 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
30.6.6 [futures.unique_future]/1 should be updated to mention
<tt>async</tt>.
</p>

<p>
30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]/1 should also be updated for
<tt>async</tt>. That paragraph also says
</p>

<blockquote>
... Its value or exception can be set by use of a
<tt>shared_future</tt>, <tt>promise</tt> (30.6.5 [futures.promise]), or <tt>packaged_task</tt> (30.6.10 [futures.task]) object that shares the same associated state.
</blockquote>

<p>
How can the value be set by a <tt>shared_future</tt>?
</p>

<p>
30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future]/1 says
</p>

<blockquote>
An <tt>atomic_future</tt> object can only be created by use of a
<tt>promise</tt> (30.6.5 [futures.promise]) or
<tt>packaged_task</tt> (30.6.10 [futures.task]) object.
</blockquote>

<p>
which is wrong, it's created from a <tt>std::future</tt>, which could
have been default-cosntructed. That paragraph should be closer to the
text of 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]/1, and should also mention
<tt>async</tt>.
</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1281"></a>1281. CopyConstruction and Assignment between ratios having the same normalized form</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Vicente Juan Botet Escrib� <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-07 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
CopyConstruction and Assignment between <tt>ratio</tt>s having the same
normalized form. Current
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf">N3000</a>
do not allows to copy-construct or assign <tt>ratio</tt> instances of
<tt>ratio</tt> classes having the same normalized form.
</p>

<p>
Two <tt>ratio</tt> classes <tt>ratio&lt;N1,D1&gt;</tt> and
<tt>ratio&lt;N2,D2&gt;</tt> have the same normalized form if
</p>

<blockquote><pre>ratio&lt;N1, D1&gt;::num == ratio&lt;N2, D2&gt;::num &amp;&amp;
ratio&lt;N1, D1&gt;::den == ratio&lt;N2, D2&gt;::den
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This simple example
</p>

<blockquote><pre>ratio&lt;1,3&gt; r1;
ratio&lt;3,9&gt; r2;
r1 = r2; // (1)
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
fails to compile in (1). Other example
</p>

<blockquote><pre>ratio&lt;1,3&gt; r1;
ratio_subtract&lt;ratio&lt;2,3&gt;, ratio&lt;1,3&gt;&gt;::type r2;
r1 = r2;  
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The nested type of <tt>ratio_subtract&lt;ratio&lt;2,3&gt;,
ratio&lt;1,3&gt;&gt;</tt> could be <tt>ratio&lt;3,9&gt;</tt> so the compilation
could fail. It could also be <tt>ratio&lt;1,3&gt;</tt> and the compilation
succeeds.
</p>

<p>
In 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] 3 and similar clauses
</p>

<blockquote>
3 The nested typedef <tt>type</tt> shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio&lt;T1,
T2&gt;</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>.
</blockquote>

<p>
the meaning of synonym let think that the result shall be a normalized
<tt>ratio</tt> equivalent to <tt>ratio&lt;T1, T2&gt;</tt>, but there is not an
explicit definition of what synonym means in this context.
</p>

<p>
Additionally we should add a typedef for accessing the normalized
<tt>ratio</tt>, and  change 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] to return only this
<em>normalized</em> result.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
There is no consensus to add the converting copy constructor or converting copy
assignment operator.  However there was consensus to add the typedef.
</p>

<p>
Proposed wording modified.  Original proposed wording preserved here.  Moved to
Review.
</p>

<blockquote class="note">
<p>
Make <tt>ratio</tt> default constructible, copy-constructible and assignable
from any <tt>ratio</tt> which has the same reduced form.
</p>

<p>
Add to 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio] synopsis
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;intmax_t N, intmax_t D = 1&gt;
class ratio {
public:
  static constexpr intmax_t num;
  static constexpr intmax_t den;

  <ins>typedef ratio&lt;num, den&gt; type;</ins>

  <ins>ratio() = default;
  template &lt;intmax_t N2, intmax_t D2&gt;
    ratio(const ratio&lt;N2, D2&gt;&amp;);
  template &lt;intmax_t N2, intmax_t D2&gt;
    ratio&amp; operator=(const ratio&lt;N2, D2&gt;&amp;);</ins>
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add to 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Two ratio classes <tt>ratio&lt;N1,D1&gt;</tt> and <tt>ratio&lt;N2,D2&gt;</tt>
have the same reduced form if <tt>ratio&lt;N1,D1&gt;::type</tt> is the same
type as <tt>ratio&lt;N2,D2&gt;::type</tt>
</p>

</blockquote>

<p>
Add a new section: [ratio.cons]
</p>

<blockquote>
<p><b>
Construction and assignment  [ratio.cons]
</b></p>

<pre>template &lt;intmax_t N2, intmax_t D2&gt;
  ratio(const ratio&lt;N2, D2&gt;&amp; r);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> Constructs a <tt>ratio</tt> object.
</p>
<p>
<i>Remarks:</i> This constructor shall not participate in overload resolution
unless <tt>r</tt> has the same reduced form as <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;intmax_t N2, intmax_t D2&gt;
  ratio&amp; operator=(const ratio&lt;N2, D2&gt;&amp; r);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
<i>Effects:</i> None.
</p>
<p>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>
<p>
<i>Remarks:</i> This operator shall not participate in overload resolution
unless <tt>r</tt> has the same reduced form as <tt>*this</tt>.
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p>
Change 20.6.2 [ratio.arithmetic] 
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Implementations may use other algorithms to compute these values. If overflow
occurs, a diagnostic shall be issued.
</p>

<pre>template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_add {
  typedef <i>see below</i> type;
};
</pre>

<blockquote>
The nested typedef <tt>type</tt> shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio&lt;T1,
T2&gt;<ins>::type</ins></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>.
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_subtract {
  typedef <i>see below</i> type;
};
</pre>

<blockquote>
The nested typedef <tt>type</tt> shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio&lt;T1,
T2&gt;<ins>::type</ins></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>.
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_multiply {
  typedef <i>see below</i> type;
};
</pre>

<blockquote>
The nested typedef <tt>type</tt> shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio&lt;T1,
T2&gt;<ins>::type</ins></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>

<pre>template &lt;class R1, class R2&gt; struct ratio_divide {
  typedef <i>see below</i> type;
};
</pre>

<blockquote>
The nested typedef <tt>type</tt> shall be a synonym for <tt>ratio&lt;T1,
T2&gt;<ins>::type</ins></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>.
</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-03-27 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
Daniel brought to my attention the recent addition of the typedef <tt>type</tt>
to the FCD
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3092.pdf">N3092</a>:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>typedef ratio type;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
This issue was discussed in Pittsburgh, and the decision there was to accept the
typedef as proposed and move to Review.  Unfortunately the issue was accidently
applied to the FCD, and incorrectly.  The FCD version of the typedef refers to
<tt>ratio&lt;N, D&gt;</tt>, but the typedef is intended to refer to
<tt>ratio&lt;num, den&gt;</tt> which in general is not the same type.
</p>

<p>
I've updated the wording to diff against
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3092.pdf">N3092</a>.
</p>

</blockquote>

<p><i>[Batavia: NAD Editorial - see rationale below]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>Already fixed in working draft

<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to 20.6.1 [ratio.ratio] synopsis
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;intmax_t N, intmax_t D = 1&gt;
class ratio {
public:
  static constexpr intmax_t num;
  static constexpr intmax_t den;

  typedef ratio<ins>&lt;num, den&gt;</ins> type;
};
</pre></blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1282"></a>1282. A proposal to add std::split algorithm</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 25 [algorithms] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Igor Semenov <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-07 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<ol type="I">

<li>
<p>
Motivation and Scope
</p>
<p>
Splitting strings into parts by some set of delimiters is an often task, but
there is no simple and generalized solution in C++ Standard. Usually C++
developers use <tt>std::basic_stringstream&lt;&gt;</tt> to split string into
parts, but there are several inconvenient restrictions:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
we cannot explicitly assign the set of delimiters;
</li>
<li>
this approach is suitable only for strings, but not for other types of
containers;
</li>
<li>
we have (possible) performance leak due to string instantiation.
</li>
</ul>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Impact on the Standard
</p>
<p>
This algorithm doesn't interfere with any of current standard algorithms.
</p>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Design Decisions
</p>
<p>
This algorithm is implemented in terms of input/output iterators. Also, there is
one additional wrapper for <tt>const CharType *</tt> specified delimiters.
</p>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Example implementation
</p>
<pre>template&lt; class It, class DelimIt, class OutIt &gt;
void split( It begin, It end, DelimIt d_begin, DelimIt d_end, OutIt out )
{
   while ( begin != end )
   {
       It it = std::find_first_of( begin, end, d_begin, d_end );
       *out++ = std::make_pair( begin, it );
       begin = std::find_first_of( it, end, d_begin, d_end,
           std::not2( std::equal_to&lt; typename It::value_type &gt;() ) );
   }
}

template&lt; class It, class CharType, class OutIt &gt;
void split( It begin, It end, const CharType * delim, OutIt out )
{
   split( begin, end, delim, delim + std::strlen( delim ), out );
}
</pre>
</li>

<li>
<p>
Usage
</p>
<pre>std::string ss( "word1 word2 word3" );
std::vector&lt; std::pair&lt; std::string::const_iterator, std::string::const_iterator &gt; &gt; v;
split( ss.begin(), ss.end(), " ", std::back_inserter( v ) );

for ( int i = 0; i &lt; v.size(); ++i )
{
   std::cout &lt;&lt; std::string( v[ i ].first, v[ i ].second ) &lt;&lt; std::endl;
}
// word1
// word2
// word3
</pre>
</li>

</ol>

<p><i>[
2010-01-22 Moved to Tentatively NAD Future after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The LWG is not considering completely new features for standardization at this
time.  We would like to revisit this good suggestion for a future TR and/or
standard.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to the synopsis in 25.1 [algorithms.general]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2, class OutputIterator &gt;
  void split( ForwardIterator1 first, ForwardIterator1 last,
              ForwardIterator2 delimiter_first, ForwardIterator2 delimiter_last,
              OutputIterator result );

template&lt; class ForwardIterator1, class CharType, class OutputIterator &gt;
  void split( ForwardIterator1 first, ForwardIterator1 last,
              const CharType * delimiters, OutputIterator result );
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add a new section [alg.split]:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt; class ForwardIterator1, class ForwardIterator2, class OutputIterator &gt;
  void split( ForwardIterator1 first, ForwardIterator1 last,
              ForwardIterator2 delimiter_first, ForwardIterator2 delimiter_last,
              OutputIterator result );
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
1. <i>Effects:</i> splits the range <tt>[first, last)</tt> into parts, using any
element of <tt>[delimiter_first, delimiter_last)</tt> as a delimiter. Results
are pushed to output iterator in the form of <tt>std::pair&lt;ForwardIterator1,
ForwardIterator1&gt;</tt>. Each of these pairs specifies a maximal subrange of
<tt>[first, last)</tt> which does not contain a delimiter.
</p>
<p>
2. <i>Returns:</i> nothing.
</p>
<p>
3. <i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt>last - first</tt> assignments.
</p>
</blockquote>

<pre>template&lt; class ForwardIterator1, class CharType, class OutputIterator &gt;
  void split( ForwardIterator1 first, ForwardIterator1 last,
              const CharType * delimiters, OutputIterator result );
</pre>

<blockquote>
<p>
1. <i>Effects:</i> split the range <tt>[first, last)</tt> into parts, using any
element of <tt>delimiters</tt> (interpreted as zero-terminated string) as a
delimiter. Results are pushed to output iterator in the form of
<tt>std::pair&lt;ForwardIterator1, ForwardIterator1&gt;</tt>. Each of these
pairs specifies a maximal subrange of <tt>[first, last)</tt> which does not
contain a delimiter.
</p>
<p>
2. <i>Returns:</i> nothing.
</p>
<p>
3. <i>Complexity:</i> Exactly <tt>last - first</tt> assignments.
</p>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1289"></a>1289. Generic casting requirements for smart pointers</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Ion Gazta�aga <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-14 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In section 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements], Table 40 � Allocator requirements,
the following expression is required for allocator pointers:
</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>static_cast&lt;X::pointer&gt;(w)</tt></td>
<td><tt>X::pointer</tt></td>
<td><tt>static_cast&lt;X::pointer&gt;(w) == p</tt></td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
To achieve this expression, a smart pointer writer must introduce an explicit
conversion operator from <tt>smart_ptr&lt;void&gt;</tt> to
<tt>smart_ptr&lt;T&gt;</tt> so that
<tt>static_cast&lt;pointer&gt;(void_ptr)</tt> is a valid expression.
Unfortunately this explicit conversion weakens the safety of a smart pointer
since the following expression (invalid for raw pointers) would become valid:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>smart_ptr&lt;void&gt; smart_v = ...;
smart_ptr&lt;T&gt; smart_t(smart_v);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
On the other hand, <tt>shared_ptr</tt> also defines its own casting functions in
20.9.10.2.10 [util.smartptr.shared.cast], and although it's unlikely that a
programmer will use <tt>shared_ptr</tt> as <tt>allocator::pointer</tt>, having
two different ways to do the same cast operation does not seem reasonable. A
possible solution would be to replace <tt>static_cast&lt;X::pointer&gt;(w)</tt>
expression with a user customizable (via ADL)
<tt>static_pointer_cast&lt;value_type&gt;(w)</tt>, and establish the
<tt>xxx_pointer_cast</tt> functions introduced by <tt>shared_ptr</tt> as the
recommended generic casting utilities of the standard.
</p>

<p>
Unfortunately, we've experienced problems in Boost when trying to establish
<tt>xxx_pointer_cast</tt> as customization points for generic libraries (<a href="http://objectmix.com/c/40424-adl-lookup-explicit-template-parameters.html">http://objectmix.com/c/40424-adl-lookup-explicit-template-parameters.html</a>)
because these casting functions are called with explicit template parameters and
the standard says in 14.8.1 [temp.arg.explicit] p.8 "Explicit template
argument specification":
</p>

<blockquote>
8 ...But when a function template with explicit template arguments is used, the
call does not have the correct syntactic form unless there is a function
template with that name visible at the point of the call. If no such name is
visible, the call is not syntactically well-formed and argument-dependent lookup
does not apply.
</blockquote>

<p>
So we can do this:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class BasePtr&gt;
void generic_ptr_swap(BasePtr p)
{
  //ADL customization point
  swap(p, p);
  //...
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
but not the following:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class BasePtr&gt;
void generic_ptr_algo(BasePtr p)
{
  typedef std::pointer_traits&lt;BasePtr&gt;::template
     rebind&lt;Derived&gt; DerivedPtr;
  DerivedPtr dp = static_pointer_cast&lt;Derived&gt;(p);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The solution to make <tt>static_pointer_cast</tt> a customization point is to
add a generic declaration (no definition) of <tt>static_pointer_cast</tt> in a
namespace (like <tt>std</tt>) and apply "<tt>using
std::static_pointer_cast</tt>" declaration to activate ADL:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>namespace std{

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
static_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;

}

template&lt;class BasePtr&gt;
void generic_ptr_algo(BasePtr p)
{
  typedef std::pointer_traits&lt;BasePtr&gt;::template
     rebind&lt;Derived&gt; DerivedPtr;

  //ADL applies because static_pointer_cast is made
  //  visible according to [temp.arg.explicit]/8
  using std::static_pointer_cast;

  DerivedPtr dp = static_pointer_cast&lt;Derived&gt;(p);

  //...
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
A complete solution will need also the definition of
<tt>static_pointer_cast</tt> for raw pointers, and this definition has been
present in Boost (<a href="http://www.boost.org/boost/pointer_cast.hpp">http://www.boost.org/boost/
pointer_cast.hpp</a>) for years.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-03-26 Daniel made editorial adjustments to the proposed wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
Moved to NAD Future at 2010-11 Batavia
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
This is a new feature rather than a defect. 
It can be added later: "this is such a hairy area that people will put up with changes"
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add to section 20.3 [utility] Utility components, Header
<tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> synopsis:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// 20.3.X, generic pointer cast functions

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
static_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
dynamic_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
const_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;

//Overloads for raw pointers
template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
auto static_pointer_cast(T* t) -&gt; decltype(static_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t));

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
auto dynamic_pointer_cast(T* t) -&gt; decltype(dynamic_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t));

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
auto const_pointer_cast(T* t) -&gt; decltype(const_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t));
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Add to section 20.3 [utility] Utility components, a new subclause
20.3.X Pointer cast utilities [pointer.cast]:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
20.3.X Pointer cast utilities [pointer.cast]
</p>

<p>
1 The library defines generic pointer casting function templates so that template code
can explicitly make these names visible and activate argument-dependent lookup
for pointer cast calls.
</p>

<pre>//Generic declarations
template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
static_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
dynamic_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;

template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
<i>unspecified</i>
const_pointer_cast(T&amp;&amp;) = delete;
</pre>

<p>
2 The library also defines overloads of these functions for raw pointers.
</p>

<pre>//Overloads for raw pointers
template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
auto static_pointer_cast(T* t) -&gt; decltype(static_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t));
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>static_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t)</tt>
</blockquote>

<pre>template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
auto dynamic_pointer_cast(T* t) -&gt; decltype(dynamic_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t));
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>dynamic_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t)</tt>
</blockquote>

<pre>template&lt;typename U, typename T&gt;
auto const_pointer_cast(T* t) -&gt; decltype(const_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t));
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>const_cast&lt;U*&gt;(t)</tt>
</blockquote>

<p>
[<i>Example:</i>
</p>

<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;utility&gt; //static_pointer_cast
#include &lt;memory&gt;  //pointer_traits

class Base{};
class Derived : public Base{};

template&lt;class BasePtr&gt;
void generic_pointer_code(BasePtr b)
{
   typedef std::pointer_traits&lt;BasePtr&gt;::template
      rebind&lt;Derived&gt; DerivedPtr;

   using std::static_pointer_cast;
   //ADL applies now that static_pointer_cast is visible
   DerivedPtr d = static_pointer_cast&lt;Derived&gt;(b);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
� <i>end example</i>]
</p>

</blockquote>

<p>
Replace in section 20.2.5 [allocator.requirements] Table 40 � Allocator
requirements, the following table entries for allocator pointers:
</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>static<ins>_pointer</ins>_cast&lt;<del>X::pointer</del><ins>T</ins>&gt;(w)</tt></td>
<td><tt>X::pointer</tt></td>
<td><tt>static<ins>_pointer</ins>_cast&lt;<del>X::pointer</del><ins>T</ins>&gt;(w) == p</tt></td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td><tt>static<ins>_pointer</ins>_cast&lt;<del>X::const_pointer</del><ins>const T</ins>&gt;(w)</tt></td>
<td><tt>X::const_pointer</tt></td>
<td><tt>static<ins>_pointer</ins>_cast&lt;<del>X::const_pointer</del><ins>const T</ins>&gt;(z) == q</tt></td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>

</tbody></table>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1291"></a>1291. exceptions thrown during <tt>promise::set_value</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-18 <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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In 30.6.5 [futures.promise]
</p>

<p>
Does <tt>promise&lt;R&gt;::set_value</tt> return normally if the copy/move
constructor of <tt>R</tt> throws?
</p>

<p>
The exception could be caught and set using
<tt>promise&lt;R&gt;::set_exception</tt>, or it could be allowed to leave the
<tt>set_value</tt> call, but it's not clear which is intended. I suggest the
exception should not be caught.
</p>

<p>
N.B. This doesn't apply to <tt>promise&lt;R&amp;&gt;::set_value</tt> or
<tt>promise&lt;void&gt;::set_value</tt> because they don't construct a new
object.
</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 30.6.5 [futures.promise]/18:
</p>

<blockquote>
18 <i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> if its associated state is already
ready<ins> or, for the first version an exception thrown by the copy constructor
of <tt>R</tt>, or for the second version an exception thrown by the move
constructor of <tt>R</tt></ins>.
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1296"></a>1296. <tt>map</tt> and <tt>multimap value_compare</tt> overspecified</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-22 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The container class templates <tt>map</tt> and <tt>multimap</tt> both contain a
nested type called <tt>value_compare</tt>, that is used to compare the
<tt>value_type pair</tt> elements, an adaptor of the user-supplied comparison
function-like object.
</p>

<p>
I believe these types are over-specified, as we require a distinct type for each
template, even though the allocator plays no part in the comparator, and
<tt>map</tt> and <tt>multimap value_compare</tt> classes could easily be shared.
 The benefits are similar to the SCARY iterator proposal (although on a much
smaller scale!) but unlike SCARY, this is not a QoI issue today but actively
prohibited.
</p>

<p>
If the <tt>value_compare</tt> classes were marked 'exposition only', a vendor
would be free to experiment with implementations that do not produce so many
template instantiations with negligible impact on conforming programs.  (There
is a minor risk that programs could no longer portably overload functions taking
<tt>value_compare</tt> types.  This scenario is extremely unlikely outside
conformance suites.)
</p>

<p>
(Note that there are no similar problems for unordered maps, nor any of the set
variants)
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-01-31 Moved to Tentatively NAD after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>value_compare</tt> specification is an unfortunate bit from the past
that we have to live with.  Fortunately vendors can work around the problems
mentioned in this issue.
</p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
p2 23.6.1 [map]:
Above the declaration of class <tt>value_compare</tt> in the map synopsis, add:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
          class Allocator = allocator&lt;pair&lt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
class map {
public:
  // types:
  ...
  <ins>// exposition only.</ins>
  class value_compare
    : public binary_function&lt;value_type,value_type,bool&gt; {
    ...
</pre></blockquote>



<p>
p2 23.6.2 [multimap]:
Above the declaration of class <tt>value_compare</tt> in the map synopsis, add:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Key, class T, class Compare = less&lt;Key&gt;,
          class Allocator = allocator&lt;pair&lt;const Key, T&gt; &gt; &gt;
class multimap {
public:
  // types:
  ...
  <ins>// exposition only.</ins>
  class value_compare
    : public binary_function&lt;value_type,value_type,bool&gt; {
    ...
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1300"></a>1300. circular definition of <tt>promise::swap</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-12-26 <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#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
30.6.5 [futures.promise]/12 defines the effects of
<tt>promise::swap(promise&amp;)</tt> as
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(promise&amp; other);
</pre>
<blockquote>
12 <i>Effects:</i> <tt>swap(*this, other)</tt>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>
and 30.6.5 [futures.promise]/25 defines <tt>swap(promise&lt;R&amp;&gt;,
promise&lt;R&gt;&amp;)</tt> as
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class R&gt;
  void swap(promise&lt;R&gt;&amp; x, promise&lt;R&gt;&amp; y);
</pre>
<blockquote>
25 <i>Effects:</i> <tt>x.swap(y)</tt>.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-13 Daniel added "Throws: Nothing."
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-01-14 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Change 30.6.5 [futures.promise] paragraph 12
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void swap(promise&amp; other);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
12 <i>Effects:</i> <del><tt>swap(*this, other)</tt></del> <ins>Exchanges the
associated
states of <tt>*this</tt> and <tt>other</tt>.</ins>
</p>
<p>
13 ...
</p>
<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> Nothing.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1301"></a>1301. <tt>clear()</tt> and assignment</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nicolai Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 2010-01-01 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
I propose that <tt>clear()</tt> be defined to be equivalent to
<tt>erase(begin(),end())</tt> except not using copy or move of elements.
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
To: C++ libraries mailing list<br>
Message c++std-lib-26465
</p>

<p>
and specifiying as post: <tt>size()==0</tt> might also not be appropriate
because forward-Lists provide no <tt>size()</tt>, this it should be:
post: <tt>empty()==true</tt>
</p>

<p>
Bjarne Stroustrup schrieb/wrote:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
To: C++ libraries mailing list<br>
Message c++std-lib-26458
</p>

<p>
in table 94 we define <tt>clear()</tt> as:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>a.clear() void erase(begin(), end())
post: size() == 0
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Now <tt>erase</tt> requires assignment (<tt>MoveAssignable</tt>) which makes
sense if we have to move an element, but why should that be required from
<tt>clear()</tt> where all elements are destroyed?
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-01-23 Alisdiar provides wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-01-30 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-01-30 Daniel opens:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
First, I read the newly proposed spec for <tt>clear()</tt> that it does in
general <em>not</em> invalidate a previous past-the-end iterator value, but
<tt>deque</tt> says in 23.3.2.3 [deque.modifiers] for the semantics of
<tt>erase</tt> that erasures at the end will invalidate the past-the-end
iterator. With removal of a direct binding between <tt>clear()</tt> and
<tt>erase()</tt> there seem to be some fixes necessary. One way to fix that
would be to mention in Table 94 that this "may also invalidate the past-the-end
iterator" and then to mention for all specific containers where this does not
happen, the exception, [1] e.g. in <tt>std::vector</tt>. <tt>std::vector</tt>
has no own specification of <tt>clear()</tt> and one aspect of the closed issue
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1102">1102</a> was to realize just that (indirectly via <tt>erase</tt>). IMO
we should now add an extra specification for <tt>clear()</tt>. Btw.:
<tt>std::vector::erase</tt> reads to me that it would invalidate previous
past-the-end values (and that seems correct in general).
</p>
<p>
Before I will provide explicit wording, I would like to
discuss these points.
</p>

<p>
[1] <tt>std::list</tt> does fortunately specify that clear does not invalidate
the past-the-end iterator.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-02-08 Moved to Tentatively NAD Editorial after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
Rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved as proposed by LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#704">704</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<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>
Replace the following words from 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>a.clear()</tt></td>
<td><tt>void</tt></td>
<td><del><tt>erase(begin(), end())</tt></del><br>
<ins>Destroys all elements in the container a. Invalidates all references,
pointers, and iterators referring to the elements of <tt>a</tt> and may
invalidate the past-the-end iterator.</ins><br>
post: <tt><del>size() == 0</del> <ins>a.empty() == true</ins></tt>.  </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</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>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1302"></a>1302. different <tt>emplace</tt> semantics for sequence and associated containers</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.4 [associative.reqmts], 23.2.5 [unord.req] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nicolai Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 2010-01-03 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
According to the new naming scheme introduced with
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2680.pdf">N2680</a>
</p>

<blockquote><pre>vector&lt;T&gt; v;
v.emplace(v.begin(),x,y,z)
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
now has a different semantics than
</p>

<blockquote><pre>set&lt;T&gt; s;
s.emplace(s.begin(),x,y,z);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
While the version for <tt>vector</tt>s takes the first argument as position and
the remaining for construction, the version for <tt>set</tt>s takes all
arguments for construction.
</p>

<p>
IMO, this is a serious design mistake for a couple of reasons:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
<p>
First, in principle, all STL member functions should have the same behavior with
the same member function to avoid confusion and allow to write proper generic
code.
</p>
<p>
In fact, when I write the following simple function template:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>template &lt;typename T&gt;
void doEmplace (T&amp; cont)
{
   cont.emplace(cont.begin(),"nico","josuttis",42);
}
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
the semantics depends on the type of the container.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In addition, I also guess using the name <tt>emplace_hint()</tt> instead of
<tt>emplace()</tt> for associative containers is a design mistake. According to
my knowledge, it was a design goal of the original STL to provide ONE
<tt>insert</tt> function, which works for ALL containers. This was
<tt>insert(pos,val)</tt>.
</p>
<p>
The trick to declare <tt>pos</tt> as a hint, allowed that we could implement a
generic <tt>insert</tt> for all containers. Now, with the new <tt>emplace</tt>
naming scheme, this trick is gone for the new kind of insertion.
</p>
</li>
</ul>

<p>
I consider this to be a serious design penalty because once this
is specified we can't fix that without breaking backward compatibility.
</p>

<p>
However, we have two choices for a fix:
</p>

<ul>
<li>
rename <tt>emplace_hint(pos,val)</tt> for associative containers back to
<tt>emplace(pos,val)</tt>. However to avoid the overloading problems, we also
have to rename the existing <tt>emplace(val)</tt> functions to something else (I
don't have a good name here at hand).
</li>
<li>
Keep <tt>emplace(val)</tt> for associative containers as it is, but rename
<tt>emplace(pos,val)</tt> for sequence containers and
<tt>emplace_hint(pos,val)</tt> to something like <tt>emplace_at(pos,val)</tt>,
declaring that <tt>pos</tt> is a hint for associative containers.
</li>
</ul>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD, rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
There was no consensus to make this change.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p> In 23.2.5 [unord.req], change: </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 pre-/post-condition</th>
      <th>Post-condition</th>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td colspan="4">...</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td><tt>a_uniq.emplace<ins>_value</ins>(args)</tt></td>
      <td><tt>pair&lt;iterator, bool&gt;</tt></td>
      <td>inserts a T object t constructed with std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...<br>
        if and only if there is no element in the container with key equivalent 
        to the key of t.<br>
        The bool 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 t.</td>
      <td>logarithmic</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td><tt>a_eq.emplace<ins>_value</ins>(args)</tt></td>
      <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
      <td>inserts a T object t constructed with std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)... 
        and returns the iterator pointing to the newly inserted element.</td>
      <td>logarithmic</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td><tt>a.emplace<del>_hint</del>(p,args)</tt></td>
      <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
      <td>equivalent to
      <tt>a.emplace<ins>_value</ins>(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...)</tt>.
      Return value is an iterator pointing to the element with the key
      equivalent to the newly inserted element. The const_iterator p is a hint
      pointing to where the search should start. Implementations are permitted
      to ignore the hint.</td> <td>logarithmic in general, but amortized
      constant if the element is inserted right after p</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td colspan="4">... </td>
    </tr>
  </tbody></table>
  
</blockquote>
<p> In 23.2.5 [unord.req], change: </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 pre-/post-condition</th>
      <th>Post-condition</th>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td colspan="4">...</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td><tt>a_uniq.emplace<ins>_value</ins>(args)</tt></td>
      <td><tt>pair&lt;iterator, bool&gt;</tt></td>
      <td>inserts a <tt>T</tt> object <tt>t</tt> constructed with <tt>std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...</tt> if 
        and only if there is no element in the container with key equivalent to 
        the key of <tt>t</tt>. The bool 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 t.</td>
      <td>Average case O(1), worst case O(a_uniq.size()).</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td><tt>a_eq.emplace<ins>_value</ins>(args)</tt></td>
      <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
      <td>inserts a T object t constructed with std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)... 
        and returns the iterator pointing to the newly inserted element.</td>
      <td>Average case O(1), worst case O(a_eq.size()).</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td><tt>a.emplace<del>_hint</del>(p,args)</tt></td>
      <td><tt>iterator</tt></td>
      <td>equivalent to
      <tt>a.emplace<ins>_value</ins>(std::forward&lt;Args&gt;(args)...)</tt>.
      Return value is an iterator pointing to the element with the key
      equivalent to the newly inserted element. The const_iterator p 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(a.size()).</td>
    </tr>
    <tr> 
      <td colspan="4">... </td>
    </tr>
  </tbody></table>
</blockquote>

<p>
In 23.6.1 [map], 23.6.3 [set], 23.7.1 [unord.map], 23.7.3 [unord.set], change:
</p>
<blockquote> 
  <p><i>// modifiers:</i><br>
    <tt>template &lt;class... Args&gt; pair&lt;iterator, bool&gt; emplace<ins>_value</ins>(Args&amp;&amp;... 
    args);<br>
    template &lt;class... Args&gt; iterator emplace<del>_hint</del>(const_iterator 
    position, Args&amp;&amp;... args);</tt></p>
</blockquote>

<p>
In 23.6.2 [multimap], 23.6.4 [multiset], 23.7.2 [unord.multimap], 23.7.4 [unord.multiset], change:
</p>
<blockquote> 
  <p><i>// modifiers:<br></i><tt>template &lt;class... Args&gt; iterator emplace<ins>_value</ins>(Args&amp;&amp;... 
    args);<br>
    template &lt;class... Args&gt; iterator emplace<del>_hint</del>(const_iterator position, 
    Args&amp;&amp;... args);<br>
    </tt> </p>
</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1304"></a>1304. missing preconditions for <tt>shared_future</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <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#futures.shared_future">issues</a> in [futures.shared_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The revised futures package in the current working paper simplified the
<tt>is_ready/has_exception/has_value</tt> set of APIs, replacing them with a
single 'valid' method.  This method is used in many places to signal pre- and
post- conditions, but that edit is not complete.  Each method on a
<tt>shared_future</tt> that requires an associated state should have a
pre-condition that <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-01-28 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Insert the following extra paragraphs:
</p>

<p>
In 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>shared_future();
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
4 <i>Effects:</i> constructs ...
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Postcondition:</i> <tt>valid() == false</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> nothing.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>void wait() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
22 <i>Effects:</i> if the associated ...
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Rep, class Period&gt;
  bool wait_for(const chrono::duration&lt;Rep, Period&gt;&amp; rel_time) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
23 <i>Effects:</i> if the associated ...
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Clock, class Duration&gt;
  bool wait_until(const chrono::time_point&lt;Clock, Duration&gt;&amp; abs_time) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
25 <i>Effects:</i> blocks until ...
</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1305"></a>1305. preconditions for <tt>atomic_future</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <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#futures.atomic_future">issues</a> in [futures.atomic_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p>
The revised futures package in the current working paper simplified the
<tt>is_ready/has_exception/has_value</tt> set of APIs, replacing them with a
single 'valid' method.  This method is used in many places to signal pre- and
post- conditions, but that edit is not complete.  
</p>

<p>
Atomic future retains the extended earlier API, and provides defined,
synchronized behaviour for all calls.  However, some preconditions and throws
clauses are missing, which can easily be built around the new <tt>valid()</tt>
api.  Note that for consistency, I suggest <tt>is_ready/has_exception/has_value
throw</tt> an exception if <tt>valid()</tt> is not <tt>true</tt>, rather than
return <tt>false</tt>.  I think this is implied by the existing pre-condition on
<tt>is_ready</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-01-23 See discussion starting with Message c++std-lib-26666.
]</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/n3058.html">N3058</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Insert the following extra paragraphs:
</p>

<p>
In 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future]
</p>

<blockquote><pre>bool is_ready() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>
17 <i><del>Precondition</del> <ins>Requires</ins>:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</p>

<p>
18 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> only if the associated state is ready.
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> with an error condition of
<tt>no_state</tt> if the precondition is not met.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>bool has_exception() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
19 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> only if the associated state is ready and
contains an exception.
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> with an error condition of
<tt>no_state</tt> if the precondition is not met.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>bool has_value() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
20 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> only if the associated state is ready and
contains a value.
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> with an error condition of
<tt>no_state</tt> if the precondition is not met.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>void wait() const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
22 <i>Effects:</i> blocks until ...
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> with an error condition of
<tt>no_state</tt> if the precondition is not met.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Rep, class Period&gt;
  bool wait_for(const chrono::duration&lt;Rep, Period&gt;&amp; rel_time) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
23 <i>Effects:</i> blocks until ...
</p>

<p>
24 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> only if ...
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> with an error condition of
<tt>no_state</tt> if the precondition is not met.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class Clock, class Duration&gt;
  bool wait_until(const chrono::time_point&lt;Clock, Duration&gt;&amp; abs_time) const;
</pre>
<blockquote>

<p><ins>
<i>Requires:</i> <tt>valid() == true</tt>.
</ins></p>

<p>
25 <i>Effects:</i> blocks until ...
</p>

<p>
26 <i>Returns:</i> <tt>true</tt> only if ...
</p>

<p><ins>
<i>Throws:</i> <tt>future_error</tt> with an error condition of
<tt>no_state</tt> if the precondition is not met.
</ins></p>

</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1308"></a>1308. Concerns about <tt>initializer_list</tt> overloads of <tt>min</tt>,
<tt>max</tt>, and <tt>minmax</tt></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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Niels Dekker <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-02 <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.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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
In San Francisco, June 2008, <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2722.pdf">N2722</a>
was adopted, replacing the variadic templates <tt>min</tt>, <tt>max</tt>, and
<tt>minmax</tt> by overloads that have an <tt>initializer_list&lt;T&gt;</tt>
parameter. The paper showed benchmark results wherein <tt>initializer_list</tt>
versions of <tt>min</tt> appeared to outperform the corresponding variadic
template. Unfortunately, in October 2009 a very serious error was detected in
the benchmark. (<a href="http://accu.org/cgi-bin/wg21/message?wg=lib&msg=25210">c++std-lib-25210</a>).
In fact, an <tt>initializer_list&lt;T&gt;</tt> version of <tt>min</tt> often
appears to perform <i>worse</i> than the corresponding variadic template,
especially when <tt>T</tt> has an expensive copy constructor (<a href="http://accu.org/cgi-bin/wg21/message?wg=lib&msg=25253">c++std-lib-25253</a>,
<a href="http://www.xs4all.nl/~nd/dekkerware/issues/n2772_fix">http://www.xs4all.nl/~nd/dekkerware/issues/n2772_fix</a>).
</p>
<p>
IMO, the biggest problem of the <tt>initializer_list</tt> overloads is that they
pass and return <tt>T</tt> objects <i>by value</i>. Which has the following
consequences:
</p>

<ol>
<li>
They require that <tt>T</tt> is CopyConstructible. IMO that is too much of a
constraint for a generic, general purpose function like
<tt>std::min&lt;T&gt;</tt>.
</li>
<li>
They potentially throw an exception, even if <tt>T</tt>'s less-than-operator
throws nothing. (And of course, less-than typically throws nothing.)
</li>
<li>
They are inconsistent with C++03 std::<tt>min</tt> and std::<tt>max</tt>.
Consider the subtle difference between <tt>const T&amp; c1 = min(a,b);</tt> and
<tt>const T&amp; c2 = min({a,b});</tt> (<a href="http://accu.org/cgi-bin/wg21/message?wg=lib&msg=25265">c++std-lib-25265</a>)
</li>
<li>
They do not conveniently support use cases that need to have a reference to the
minimum or maximum object <i>itself</i>, rather than just a copy.
</li>
<li>
They potentially perform badly: possibly <i>O(n)</i>, when the arguments
themselves have a size of <i>n</i>.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
In the future, this problem might be solvable by using an
<tt>initializer_list</tt> of <i>const references</i>, instead:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>const T&amp; min(initializer_list&lt;const T&amp;&gt;);
const T&amp; max(initializer_list&lt;const T&amp;&gt;);
pair&lt;const T&amp;, const T&amp;&gt; minmax(initializer_list&lt;const T&amp;&gt;);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
It is unlikely that C++0x will support <tt>initializer_list&lt;const
T&amp;&gt;</tt>, but technically it seems possible to add such a language
feature after C++0x (<a href="http://accu.org/cgi-bin/wg21/message?wg=core&msg=15428">c++std-core-15428</a>).
</p>
<p>
Variadic templates of <tt>min</tt>, <tt>max</tt>, and <tt>minmax</tt>, as
proposed by <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2551.pdf">N2551</a>
(Sylvain Pion), do have some other advantages over <tt>initializer_list</tt>
overloads:
</p>
<ol>
<li>
It is likely that those variadic templates can be declared <tt>constexpr</tt>,
now that <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3006.html#991">
CWG issue #991</a> is in drafting status.
</li>
<li>
They provide complete compile-time protection against accidentally passing zero
arguments.
</li>
</ol>

<p>
Unfortunately, the variadic templates of <tt>min</tt>, <tt>max</tt>, and
<tt>minmax</tt> may still need further improvement, before having them in the
Standard Library. Especially the optional <tt>Compare</tt> parameter appears to
be a concern. So for this moment I recommend to keep both versions out of C++0x,
and postpone further discussion until after C++0x.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Discussed and the LWG still prefers the initializer list
solution of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2772.pdf">N2772</a>.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
We prefer the solution of
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2772.pdf">N2772</a>
which will be reapplied.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Remove both variadic templates and <tt>initializer_list</tt> overloads of
<tt>min</tt>, <tt>max</tt>, and <tt>minmax</tt> from the synopsis in
25.1 [algorithms.general] and from 25.4.7 [alg.min.max].
</p>

<blockquote>
<p><i>[
Note: This proposed resolution will resolve LWG <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#915">915</a> as NAD.
]</i></p>

</blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1311"></a>1311. multi-pass property of Forward Iterator underspecified</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Alisdair Meredith <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-07 <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The following example demonstrates code that would meet the guarantees of a
Forward Iterator, but only permits a single traversal of the underlying
sequence:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt; typename ForwardIterator&gt;
struct bad_iterator {
  shared_ptr&lt;ForwardIterator&gt; impl;

  bad_iterator( ForwardIterator iter ) {
     : impl{new ForwardIterator{iter} } 
     {
  }

  auto operator*() const -&gt; decltype(*ForwardIterator{}) {
     return **impl;
  }

  auto operator-&gt;() const -&gt; ForwardIterator {
     return *impl;
  }

  auto operator==(bad_iterator const &amp; rhs) {
     return impl == rhs.impl;
  }

  auto operator++() {
     ++(*imp);
  }
  // other operations as necessary...
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Here, we use <tt>shared_ptr</tt> to wrap a forward iterator, so all iterators
constructed from the same original iterator share the same 'value', and
incrementing any one copy increments all others.
</p>

<p>
There is a missing guarantee, expressed by the following code sequence
</p>

<blockquote><pre>FwdIter x = seq.begin();  // obtain forward iterator from a sequence
FwdIter y = x;            // copy the iterator
assert(x == y);           // iterators must be the same
++x;                      // increment *just one* iterator
assert(x != y);           // iterators *must now be different*
++y;                      // increment the other iterator
assert(x == y);           // now the iterators must be the same again
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
That inequality in the middle is an essential guarantee.  Note that this list is
simplified, as each assertion should also note that they refer to exactly the
same element <tt>(&amp;*x == &amp;*y)</tt> but I am not complicating the issue
with tests to support proxy iterators, or value types overloading unary
<tt>operator+</tt>.
</p>

<p>
I have not yet found a perverse example that can meet this additional
constraint, and not meet the multi-pass expectations of a Forward Iterator
without also violating other Forward Iterator requirements.
</p>

<p>
Note that I do not yet have standard-ready wording to resolve the problem, as
saying this neatly and succinctly in 'standardese' is more difficult.
</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/n3066.html">N3066</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1313"></a>1313. Seed sequence's param function not useful for pure  output iterator</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Daniel Kr�gler <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-07 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The Seed sequence requirements (26.5.1.2 [rand.req.seedseq]) require the
existence of a member function
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;typename OutputIterator&gt;
void param(OutputIterator ob);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
The fact that this function returns <tt>void</tt> instead of the value of
<tt>ob</tt> after accepting the sequence data leads to the same problem as in
issue <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#865">865</a> - In case of pure output iterators there is no way to
serialize further data into that data sink.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-02-07 Howard adds:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
At the time this issue was opened, the suggested changes are with respect to an
anticipated draft which does not yet exist.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
No technical counterarguments, but it is simply too late in the process
to make this change at this point.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
In Table 109 � Seed sequence requirements, expression "<tt>r.param(ob)</tt>"
change the<br>
Return type entry:
</p>

<blockquote><pre><del>void</del><ins>OutputIterator</ins>
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

<li>
<p>
In 26.5.7.1 [rand.util.seedseq], class seed_seq synopsis change
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template&lt;class OutputIterator&gt;
<del>void</del><ins>OutputIterator</ins> param(OutputIterator dest) const;
</pre></blockquote>
</li>

</ol>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1314"></a>1314. <tt>NULL</tt> and <tt>nullptr</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Sean Hunt <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-07 <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Currently, the 18.2 [support.types]/3 allows <tt>NULL</tt> to be any
null pointer constant. The footnote marks that 0 or 0L might be appropriate.
However, this definition also allows the implementation to define <tt>NULL</tt>
to be <tt>nullptr</tt>. This may lead to overload and conversion issues more
serious than with the C++98 version:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>void f(void*);
void f(int);

void g()
{
 // calls f(int) if NULL is integral
 // calls f(void*) if NULL is nullptr
 f(NULL);
}
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Possible resolutions:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
Forbid <tt>NULL</tt> from being <tt>nullptr</tt>
</li>
<li>
Require <tt>NULL</tt> to be <tt>nullptr</tt>
</li>
<li>
Leave it as is
</li>
</ul>

<p>
Making <tt>NULL</tt> <tt>nullptr</tt> would improve code correctness, and
breaking backwards compatibility shouldn't be a huge concern as <tt>NULL</tt>
shouldn't be used except as a null pointer constant anyways.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-02-10  Chris provided wording.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD, rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
The LWG discussed the proposed resolution and several other options.  There was
no concensus to make this or any other changes.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
18.2 [support.types]
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
3 The macro <tt>NULL</tt> <ins>is defined to be <tt>nullptr</tt>.</ins> <del>is
an implementation-defined C++ null pointer constant in this International
Standard (4.10).<sup>196</sup></del>
</p>

<p><del>
196) Possible definitions include <tt>0</tt> and <tt>0L</tt>, but not
<tt>(void*)0</tt>.
</del></p>
</blockquote>

<p>
20.9.13 [c.malloc]
</p>

<blockquote>
7 The contents are the same as the Standard C library header
<tt>&lt;string.h&gt;</tt>, with the change to <tt>memchr()</tt> specified in
21.6 <ins>and the macro <tt>NULL</tt> defined to be <tt>nullptr</tt></ins>.
</blockquote>


<p>
20.12 [date.time]
</p>

<blockquote>
2 The contents are the same as the Standard C library header
<tt>&lt;time.h&gt;</tt><del>.</del><sup>232</sup> <ins>except the macro
<tt>NULL</tt>, which is defined to be <tt>nullptr</tt>.</ins> The functions
<tt>asctime</tt>, <tt>ctime</tt>, <tt>gmtime</tt>, and <tt>localtime</tt> are
not required to avoid data races (17.6.4.8).
</blockquote>


<p>
22.6 [c.locales]
</p>

<blockquote>
2 The contents are the same as the Standard C library header
<tt>&lt;locale.h&gt;</tt> <ins>except the macro <tt>NULL</tt>, which is defined
to be <tt>nullptr</tt></ins>.
</blockquote>

<p>
C.2.2.4 [diff.null]
</p>

<blockquote>
1 The macro <tt>NULL</tt>, defined in any of <tt>&lt;clocale&gt;</tt>,
<tt>&lt;cstddef&gt;</tt>, <tt>&lt;cstdio&gt;</tt>, <tt>&lt;cstdlib&gt;</tt>,
<tt>&lt;cstring&gt;</tt>, <tt>&lt;ctime&gt;</tt>, or <tt>&lt;cwchar&gt;</tt>, is
<ins>nullptr</ins> <del>an implementation-defined C++ null pointer constant in
this International Standard (18.2).</del>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1315"></a>1315. return type of <tt>async</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.9 [futures.async] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jonathan Wakely <b>Opened:</b> 2009-02-09 <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#futures.async">issues</a> in [futures.async].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Both overloads of <tt>async</tt> return <tt>future&lt;typename
F::result_type&gt;</tt> which requires that <tt>F</tt> has a nested type. This
prevents <tt>async</tt> being used with function pointers and makes the example
in 30.6.9 [futures.async] invalid. I believe this is unintentional.
</p>

<p>
The proposed resolution also addresses editorial issues with the
<tt>launch_policy</tt> function parameter.
</p>

<p>
For the first overload it is not sufficient to return <tt>future&lt;typename
result_of&lt;F(ArgTypes...)&gt;::type&gt;</tt>.  Calling <tt>async(launch::xxx,
foo, bar)</tt> performs argument deduction on both <tt>async</tt> overloads,
which for the first overload attempts to instantiate <tt>result_of&lt;launch(F,
ArgTypes...)&gt;</tt>, which is invalid. SFINAE must be used to prevent that.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-02-12 Moved to Tentatively Ready after 5 positive votes on c++std-lib.
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010-02-12 Daniel opens:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
<p>
[..] if <tt>decay&lt;F&gt;::type</tt> is of type <tt>std::launch</tt>.
</p>
<p>
or
</p>
<p>
[..] if <tt>remove_cv&lt;remove_reference&lt;F&gt;::type&gt;::type</tt> is of
type <tt>std::launch</tt>.
</p>

<p>
The latter is the more specific form, but the former is equivalent to
the latter for all cases that can occur here. I suggest to use the
former for simplicity, but expect that implementations can effectively
use the latter.

</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:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Moved to NAD Editorial.  Rationale added below.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
Solved by N3058.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In 30.6.1 [futures.overview] paragraph 1:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class F, class... Args&gt;
  <del>future&lt;typename F::result_type&gt;</del>
  <ins>future&lt;typename result_of&lt;F(Args...)&gt;::type&gt;</ins>
  async(F&amp;&amp; f, Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class F, class... Args&gt;
  <del>future&lt;typename F::result_type&gt;</del>
  <ins>future&lt;typename result_of&lt;F(Args...)&gt;::type&gt;</ins>
  async(launch policy, F&amp;&amp; f, Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
In 30.6.9 [futures.async] before paragraph 1
</p>

<blockquote><pre>template &lt;class F, class... Args&gt;
  <del>future&lt;typename F::result_type&gt;</del>
  <ins>future&lt;typename result_of&lt;F(Args...)&gt;::type&gt;</ins>
  async(F&amp;&amp; f, Args&amp;&amp;... args);
template &lt;class F, class... Args&gt;
  <del>future&lt;typename F::result_type&gt;</del>
  <ins>future&lt;typename result_of&lt;F(Args...)&gt;::type&gt;</ins>
  async(launch policy, F&amp;&amp; f, Args&amp;&amp;... args);
</pre>
<blockquote>
<p>...</p>
<p><ins>
<i>Remarks:</i> The first signature shall not participate in overload resolution
if <tt>decay&lt;F&gt;::type</tt> is <tt>std::launch</tt>.
</ins></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1317"></a>1317. make_hash</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Nicolai M. Josuttis <b>Opened:</b> 2010-02-10 <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Currently, the library lacks a convenient way to provide a hash function that
can be used with the provided unordered containers to allow the usage of non
trivial element types.
</p>

<p>
While we can easily declare an
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::unordered_set&lt;int&gt;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
or
</p>

<blockquote><pre>std::unordered_set&lt;std::string&gt;
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
we have no easy way to declare an <tt>unordered_set</tt> for a user defined
type. IMO, this is a big obstacle to use unordered containers in practice. Note
that in Java, the wide usage of <tt>HashMap</tt> is based on the fact that there
is always a default hash function provided.
</p>

<p>
Of course, a default hash function implies the risk to provide poor hash
functions. But often even poor hash functions are good enough.
</p>

<p>
While I really would like to see a default hash function, I don't propose it
here because this would probably introduce a discussion that's too big for this
state of C++0x.
</p>

<p>
However, I strongly suggest at least to provide a convenience variadic template
function <tt>make_hash&lt;&gt;()</tt> to allow an easy definition of a (possibly
poor) hash function.
</p>

<p>
As a consequence for a user-defined type such as
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class Customer {
   friend class CustomerHash;
   private:
     string firstname;
     string lastname;
     long   no;
   ...
 };
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
would allow to specify:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class CustomerHash : public std::unary_function&lt;Customer, std::size_t&gt;
{
  public:
    std::size_t operator() (const Customer&amp; c) const  {
       return make_hash(c.firstname,c.lastname,c.no);
    }
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
instead of:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>class CustomerHash : public std::unary_function&lt;Customer, std::size_t&gt;
{
  public:
    std::size_t operator() (const Customer&amp; c) const  {
       return std::hash&lt;std::string&gt;()(c.firstname) +
              std::hash&lt;std::string&gt;()(c.lastname) +
              std::hash&lt;long&gt;()(c.no);
    }
};
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
Note that, in principle, we can either specify that
</p>

<blockquote>
<tt>make_hash</tt> returns the sum of a call of
<tt>std::hash&lt;T&gt;()(x)</tt> for each argument <tt>x</tt> of type
<tt>T</tt>
</blockquote>

<p>
or we can specify that
</p>

<blockquote>
<tt>make_hash</tt> provides a hash value for each argument, for which a
<tt>std::hash()</tt> function is provided
</blockquote>

<p>
with the possible note that the hash value may be poor or only a good hash value
if the ranges of all passed arguments is equally distributed.
</p>

<p>
For my convenience, I propose wording that describes
the concrete implementation.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010 Pittsburgh:  Moved to NAD Editorial, rationale added below.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
<p>
There is no consensus to make this change at this time.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In Function objects 20.8 [function.objects]
in paragraph 2 at the end of the Header <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> synopsis
insert:
</p>

<blockquote><pre>// convenience functions
template &lt;class T&gt;
  size_t make_hash (const T&amp;);
template &lt;class T, class... Types&gt;
  size_t make_hash (const T&amp;, const Types&amp;...);
</pre></blockquote>

<p>
In Class template hash 20.8.15 [unord.hash]
add:
</p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<b>20.7.16.1 Hash creation functions [hash.creation]</b>
</p>

<pre>template &lt;class T&gt;
  size_t make_hash (const T&amp; val);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>hash&lt;T&gt;()(val);</tt>
</blockquote>

<pre>template &lt;class T, class... Types&gt;
  size_t make_hash (const T&amp; val, const Types&amp;... args);
</pre>

<blockquote>
<i>Returns:</i> <tt>hash&lt;T&gt;()(val) + std::make_hash(args...)</tt>
</blockquote>

</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1329"></a>1329. Data races on <code>vector&lt;bool&gt;</code></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 23.2.2 [container.requirements.dataraces] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Jeffrey Yaskin <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-09 <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
The common implementation of <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> is as an
unsynchronized bitfield.  The addition of 23.2.2 [container.requirements.dataraces]/2 would require either a
change in representation or a change in access synchronization, both of
which are undesireable with respect to compatibility and performance.
</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/n3069.html">N3069</a>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Container data races 23.2.2 [container.requirements.dataraces]
</p>

<p>
Paragraph 1 is unchanged as follows:
</p>

<blockquote>
1 For purposes of avoiding data races (17.6.4.8), implementations shall
consider the following functions to be <code>const</code>:
<code>begin</code>, <code>end</code>, <code>rbegin</code>,
<code>rend</code>, <code>front</code>, <code>back</code>,
<code>data</code>, <code>find</code>, <code>lower_bound</code>,
<code>upper_bound</code>, <code>equal_range</code>, and, except in
associative containers, <code>operator[]</code>.
</blockquote>

<p>
Edit paragraph 2 as follows:
</p>

<blockquote>
2 Notwithstanding (17.6.4.8), implementations are required to avoid data
races when the contents of the contained object in different elements in
the same sequence<ins>, excepting <code>vector&lt;bool&gt;</code>,</ins>
are modified concurrently.
</blockquote>

<p>
Edit paragraph 3 as follows:
</p>

<blockquote>
3 [<i>Note:</i>
For a <code>vector&lt;int&gt; x</code> with a size greater than one,
<code>x[1] = 5</code> and <code>*x.begin() = 10</code>
can be executed concurrently without a data race,
but <code>x[0] = 5</code> and <code>*x.begin() = 10</code>
executed concurrently may result in a data race.
<ins>As an exception to the general rule,
for a <code>vector&lt;bool&gt; y</code>,
<code>y[i] = true</code> may race with <code>y[j] = true</code>.</ins>
�<i>end note</i>]
</blockquote>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1331"></a>1331. incorporate move special member functions into 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Martin Sebor <b>Opened:</b> 2010-03-10 <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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p>
Review the library portion of the spec and incorporate the newly added
core feature Move Special Member Functions (N3044).
</p>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
2010 Batavia: This has now been done to a large extent.




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1350"></a>1350. [FCD] Implicit contructors accidentally made some library types move-only</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-25</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1421">1421</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses CH-15</b></p>
<p>
Due to the new rules about implicit copy and move
constructors some library facilities are now move-only.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Make them copyable again.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1351"></a>1351. [FCD] Replace dynamic exception specifications 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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-25</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1344">1344</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses CH-16</b></p>
<p>
Dynamic exception specifications are deprecated.
Deprecated features shouldn't be used in the Standard.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Replace dynamic exception specifications with <tt>noexcept</tt>.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1352"></a>1352. [FCD] Apply <tt>noexcept</tt> where library specification says "Throws: Nothing"</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17 [library] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-25</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1346">1346</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses CH-17</b></p>
<p>
The introduction of <tt>noexcept</tt> makes "Throws: Nothing" clauses looking strange.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Consider replacing "Throws: Nothing." clause by
the respective noexcept specification.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1359"></a>1359. [FCD] Add <tt>&lt;tuple&gt;</tt> and <tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> to 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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-56</b></p>
<p>
The <tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> header provides support for several
important C++ idioms with <tt>move</tt>, <tt>forward</tt> and <tt>swap</tt>.
Likewise, <tt>declval</tt> will be frequently used like a type trait.
In order to complete cycles introduced by <tt>std::pair</tt>, the
<tt>&lt;tuple&gt;</tt> header should also be made available. This is a
similarly primitive set of functionality, with no dependency
of a hosted environment, but does go beyond the minimal
set of functionality otherwise suggested by the
freestanding libraries.
</p>
<p>
Alternatively, split the <tt>move</tt>/<tt>forward</tt>/<tt>swap</tt>/<tt>declval</tt>
functions out of <tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> and into a new primitive header,
requiring only that of freestanding implementation.
</p>

<p><i>[
Summary of Rapperswil discusions
]</i></p>

<p>
The preference of the meeting was to extract the rvalue-reference related utilities and swap into a freestanding header, but there was no clear preference for a name.  Howard suggested simply dropping them into <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt> as both these utilities and type traits are used pretty much everywhere in the library implementation, it is the most convenient place to keep them (from an implementer's perspective).
</p>

<p>
Poll: Two-way: New header for forward, move, swap, move_with_noexcept and declval vs. calling out forward, move, swap, move_with_noexcept and declval as freestanding explicitly?

SF new header: 4 WF new header: 3 WF call out as freestanding: 1 SF call out as freestanding: 2

Alisdair: Willing to write up both solutions, give us some time to think on it.

Action: Need an issue and proposed wording for GB 56 - Alisdair to draft both options as in the last poll. 
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Add <tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> and <tt>&lt;tuple&gt;</tt> to table 15, headers
required for a free-standing implementation.
</p>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-Batavia:
]</i></p>

<p>
Closed as NAD, reversing the decision at Rapperswil.
</p>
<p>
The consensus was that
any freestanding implementation is going to feel compelled to offer the important
features of <tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> even if we do not make them a freestanding
requirement; breaking out additional small headers may have additional costs at
compile time, and while the critical <tt>move</tt>-related functions could migrate
to <tt>&lt;type_traits&gt;</tt>, the header name is far from appealing; adding the
whole of <tt>&lt;utility&gt;</tt> starts to drag in dependencies on <tt>&lt;tuple&gt;</tt>
and <tt>&lt;memory&gt;</tt>, so we prefer to place the burden of slicing or supporting
this whole header on free-standing vendors.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>No consensus for a change at this time. 





<hr>
<h3><a name="1361"></a>1361. [FCD] Does use of <tt>std::size_t</tt> in a header imply that typedef name is available to users?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 17.6.2 [using] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD">NAD</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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-58</b></p>
<p>
It is not clear whether a library header specified in terms
of a typedef name makes that same typedef name
available for use, or if it simply requires that the specified
type is an alias of the same type, and so the typedef name
cannot be used without including the specific header that
defines it. For example, is the following code required to
be accepted:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>#include &lt;vector&gt;
std::size_t x = 0;
</pre></blockquote>
<p>
Most often, this question concerns the typedefs defined in
header <tt>&lt;cstddef&gt;</tt>
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
Add a paragraph under 17.6.2 [using] clarifying whether
or not headers specified in terms of <tt>std::size_t</tt> can
be used to access the typedef <tt>size_t</tt>, or whether
the header <tt>&lt;cstddef&gt;</tt> must be included to reliably
use this name.
</p>
<p><i>[Batavia: NAD - see rationale below]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>The standard is correct as written.




<hr>
<h3><a name="1373"></a>1373. [FCD] Customizable traits should have their own headers</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-79</b></p>
<p>
The library provides several traits mechanisms intended a
customization points for users. Typically, they are
declared in headers that are growing quite large. This is
not a problem for standard library vendors, who can
manage their internal file structure to avoid large
dependencies, but can be a problem for end users who
have no option but to include these large headers.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil
]</i></p>

<p>
There was no enthusiasm for touching <tt>char_traits</tt> or <tt>regex_traits</tt>.
Consensus to move <tt>iterator_traits</tt>, <tt>allocator_traits</tt>
and <tt>pointer_traits</tt> to their own respective headers once wording supplied.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010 Rapperswil
]</i></p>

<p>
After some discussion, consensus is that moving these features into separate
headers does not buy much in practice, as the larger headers will inevitably
be included anyway.  Resolve as NAD.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed in ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Move the following traits classes into their own
headers, and require the existing header to
<tt>#include</tt> the traits header to support backwards
compatibility:
</p>
<blockquote><pre>iterator_traits (plus the iterator tag-types)
allocator_traits
pointer_traits
char_traits
regex_traits
</pre></blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Batavia:
]</i></p>

<p>
Closed as NAD with the rationale below.
</p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
This suggest is not a defect, as the likely benefit is small, if any,
compared to the cost of not just implementating the feature, but also
explaining/teaching it.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1375"></a>1375. [FCD] <tt>reference_type</tt> should not have been removed from the
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#Dup">Dup</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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1318">1318</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US-87</b></p>
<p>
<tt>reference_type</tt> should not have been removed from the
allocator requirements. Even if it is always the same as
<tt>value_type&amp;</tt>, it is an important customization point for
extensions and future features.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
In [allocator.requirements] Table 42 - Allocotor Requirements, 
Add a row (after <tt>value_type</tt>) with columns:
</p>
<blockquote>
Expression: <ins><tt>X::reference_type</tt></ins><br>
Return type: <ins><tt>T&amp;</tt></ins><br>
Assertion/note...: (empty)<br>
Default: <ins><tt>T&amp;</tt></ins><br>
</blockquote>
<p>
[allocator.traits]:
</p> 
<blockquote><pre>namespace std {
  template &lt;class Alloc&gt; struct allocator_traits {
    typedef Alloc allocator_type;
    
    typedef typename Alloc::value_type value_type;

    typedef <i>see below</i>   pointer;
    typedef <i>see below</i>   const_pointer;
    typedef <i>see below</i>   void_pointer;
    typedef <i>see below</i>   const_void_pointer;
    <ins>typedef value_type&amp; reference_type;</ins>
</pre></blockquote>

Add <tt>reference_type</tt> to
allocator_traits template, defaulted to
value_type&amp;.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1376"></a>1376. [FCD] Allocator interface is not backward compatible</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-88</b></p>
<p>
Allocator interface is not backward compatible.
</p>

<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>
<a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3165.pdf">n3165</a> provides an alternative resolution.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2910 Batavia:
]</i></p>

<p>
Closed as NAD - withdrawn by the submitter.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
See <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3165.pdf">n3165</a>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>Withdrawn by the submitter.




<hr>
<h3><a name="1395"></a>1395. [FCD] Ballot Comment JP-32</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP-32</b></p>
<p>
Representations of reference link are not unified.
Most reference links to clause (table) number, say X, are
in the form "Clause X" ("Table X") capitalized, and
subsection Y.Y.Y is referenced with its number only in the
form "Y.Y.Y". Whether they are parenthesized or not
depends on the context.
However there are some notations "(Z)" consisting of only
a number Z in parentheses to confer Clause or Table
number Z.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Change "(10)" to "(Clause 10)".





<hr>
<h3><a name="1398"></a>1398. [FCD] Users should be able to specialize functors without depending on whole <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> header</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-96</b></p>
<p>
The function templates <tt>hash</tt>, <tt>less</tt> and <tt>equal_to</tt>
are important customization points for user-defined types to
be supported by several standard containers. These are
accessed through the <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> header which has
grown significantly larger in C++0x, exposing many more
facilities than a user is likely to need through there own
header, simply to declare the necessary specialization.
There should be a smaller header available for users to
make the necessary customization.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Provide a tiny forwarding header for important
functor types in the <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> header that a
user may want to specialize. This should contain
the template declaration for <tt>equal_to</tt>, <tt>hash</tt> and
<tt>less</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Rapperswill summary
]</i></p>

<p>Alisdair: Would recommend NAD unless someone takes the issue. </p>

<p>Daniel: Volunteers to write a paper for this. </p>

<p><i>[
2010-11-07 Daniel provides a paper available on the Batavia document list
]</i></p>


<p><i>[
2010 Batavia:
]</i></p>

<p>
Closed as NAD - the consensus was that forwarding headers such as
<tt>&lt;iosfwd&gt;</tt> do not bring the expected benefits, and are
not widely used (to the surprise of some active users in the room!).
Without real experience reporting a benefit, there is no further interest
in pursuing this issue as an extension - hence NAD rather than NAD Future.
</p>



<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>No consensus to make a change

<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
See paper "Forwarding <tt>&lt;functional&gt;</tt> functor templates"
on the Batavia LWG document list





<hr>
<h3><a name="1406"></a>1406. [FCD] Support hashing smart-pointers based on <i>owner</i></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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Japan <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses JP-5</b></p>
<p>
Hash support based on ownership sharing should be
supplied for <tt>shared_ptr</tt> and <tt>weak_ptr</tt>.
For two <tt>shared_ptr</tt> objects <tt>p</tt> and <tt>q</tt>, two distinct
equivalence relations can be defined. One is based on
equivalence of pointer values, which is derived from the
expression <tt>p.get() == q.get()</tt> (hereafter called <i>address based
equivalence relation</i>), the other is based on
equivalence of ownership sharing, which is derived from
the expression <tt>!p.owner_before(q) &amp;&amp; !q.owner_before(p)</tt>
(hereafter called <i>ownership-based equivalence relation</i>).
These two equivalence relations are independent in
general. For example, a <tt>shared_ptr</tt> object created by the
constructor of the signature <tt>shared_ptr(shared_ptr&lt;U&gt;
const &amp;, T *)</tt> could reveal a difference between these two
relations. Therefore, hash support based on each
equivalence relation should be supplied for <tt>shared_ptr</tt>.
However, while the standard library provides the hash
support for address-based one (20.9.11.6 paragraph 2), it
lacks the hash support for ownership-based one. In
addition, associative containers work well in combination
with the <tt>shared_ptr</tt>'s ownership-based comparison but
unordered associative containers don't. This is
inconsistent.
</p>
<p>
For the case of <tt>weak_ptr</tt>, hash support for the ownership based
equivalence relation can be safely defined on
<tt>weak_ptr</tt>s, and even on expired ones. The absence of
hash support for the ownership-based equivalence
relation is fatal, especially for expired <tt>weak_ptr</tt>s. And the
absence of such hash support precludes some quite
effective use-cases, e.g. erasing the <tt>unordered_map</tt> entry
of an expired <tt>weak_ptr</tt> key from a customized deleter
supplied to <tt>shared_ptr</tt>s.
</p>
<p>
Hash support for the ownership-based equivalence
relation cannot be provided by any user-defined manner
because information about ownership sharing is not
available to users at all. Therefore, the only way to provide
ownership-based hash support is to offer it intrusively by
the standard library.
</p>
<p>
As far as we know, such hash support is implementable.
Typical implementation of such hash function could return
the hash value of the pointer of the counter object that is
internally managed by <tt>shared_ptr</tt> and <tt>weak_ptr</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[2010 Rapperswil:]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>No consensus to make this change at this time.</p>
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<p>
Add the following non-static member functions to
<tt>shared_ptr</tt> and <tt>weak_ptr</tt> class template;
</p>
<p>
Update [util.smartptr.shared], 20.9.11.2 paragraph 1
</p>
<pre>namespace std{
template&lt;class T&gt; class shared_ptr {
public:
...
  <ins>size_t owner_hash() const;</ins>
...
};
}
</pre>
<p>
Update [util.smartptr.weak], 20.9.11.3 paragraph 1
</p>
<pre>namespace std{
template&lt;class T&gt; class weak_ptr {
public:
...
  <ins>size_t owner_hash() const;</ins>
...
};
}
</pre>
<p>
These functions satisfy the following
requirements. Let <tt>p</tt> and <tt>q</tt> be objects of either
<tt>shared_ptr</tt> or <tt>weak_ptr</tt>, <tt>H</tt> be a hypothetical
function object type that satisfies the hash
requirements ([hash.requirements], 20.2.4) and <tt>h</tt> be an object of the
type <tt>H</tt>. The expression <tt>p.owner_hash()</tt> behaves
as if it were equivalent to the expression <tt>h(p)</tt>. In
addition, <tt>h(p) == h(q)</tt> must become <tt>true</tt> if <tt>p</tt> and
<tt>q</tt> share ownership.
</p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1411"></a>1411. [FCD] Add a compile-time flag to detect <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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-26</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1410">1410</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses DE-20</b></p>

The library component <tt>monotonic_clock</tt> is conditionally
supported, but no compile-time flag exists that allows
user-code to query its existence. Further-on there exist no
portable means to simulate such a query. (To do so, user
code would be required to add types to namespace
<tt>std::chrono</tt>.)


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Provide a compile-time flag (preferably a macro)
that can be used to query the existence of
<tt>monotonic_clock</tt>.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1415"></a>1415. [FCD] iterator stability bans the short-string optimization</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
Requirements on iterators swapping allegiance would
disallow the small-string optimization.

<p><i>[
Resolved in Rapperswil by paper N3108.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Add an exclusion for <tt>basic_string</tt> to the sentence
beginning �Every iterator referring to an
element...�. Add a sentence to 21.4.6.8/2 saying
that iterators and references to string elements
remain valid, but it is not specified whether they
refer to the same string or the other string.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1419"></a>1419. [FCD] Ballot Comment US-117</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-117</b></p>

forward_list::erase_after should return an iterator.

<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="1422"></a>1422. [FCD] vector&lt;bool&gt; iterators are not random access</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <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#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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-118</b></p>
<p>
<tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> iterators are not random access iterators
because their reference type is a special class, and not
<tt>bool &amp;</tt>. All standard libary operations taking iterators
should treat this iterator as if it was a random access iterator, rather
than a simple input iterator.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed in ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Either revise the iterator requirements to support proxy iterators
(restoring functionality that was lost when the Concept facility was
removed) or add an extra paragraph to the <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt>
specification requiring the library to treat <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt>
iterators as-if they were random access iterators, despite having the wrong
reference type.
</p>

<p><i>[
Rapperswil Review
]</i></p>

<p>
The consensus at Rapperswil is that it is too late for full support for
proxy iterators, but requiring the library to respect <tt>vector&amp;;t;bool&gt;</tt>
iterators as-if they were random access would be preferable to flagging
this container as deliberately incompatible with standard library algorithms.
</p>
<p>
Alisdair to write the note, which may become normative <i>Remark</i> depending
on the preferences of the project editor.
</p>

<p><i>[
Post-Rapperswil Alisdair provides wording
]</i></p>

<p>
Initial wording is supplied, deliberately using <i>Note</i> in preference to
<i>Remark</i> although the author notes his preference for <i>Remark</i>.  The
issue of whether <tt>iterator_traits&lt;vector&lt;bool&gt;&gt;::iterator_category</tt>
is permitted to report <tt>random_access_iterator_tag</tt> or must report 
<tt>input_iterator_tag</tt> is not addressed.
</p>

<p><i>[
Old Proposed Resolution:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<p>
Insert a new paragraph into 23.4.2 [vector.bool] between p4 and p5:
</p>
<blockquote>
[<i>Note</i> All functions in the library that take a pair of iterators to
denote a range shall treat <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> iterators as-if they were
random access iterators, even though the <tt>reference</tt> type is not a
true reference.<i>-- end note</i>]
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-11 Batavia:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Closed as NAD Future, because the current iterator categories cannot correctly describe
<tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;::iterator</tt>. But saying that they are Random Access Iterators
is also incorrect, because it is not too hard to create a corresponding test that fails.
We should deal with the more general proxy iterator problem in the future, and see no
benefit to take a partial workaround specific to <tt>vector&lt;bool&gt;</tt> now.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>


<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
No consensus to make this change at this time.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1433"></a>1433. [FCD] Ballot Comment GB-119</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1432">1432</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-119</b></p>

The functions random_shuffle and shuffle both take
arguments providing a source of randomness, but one
take its argument by rvalue reference, and the other
requires an lvalue reference. The technical merits of which
form of argument passing should be settled for this
specific case, and a single preferred form used
consistently.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
[DEPENDS ON WHETHER RVALUE OR
LVALUE REFERENCE IS THE PREFERRED
FORM]





<hr>
<h3><a name="1434"></a>1434. [FCD] Ballot Comment US-122</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</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#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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-122</b></p>

It was the LWG's intent in Pittsburgh that N2772 be
applied to the WP.

<p><i>[
Resolved in Rapperswil by paper N3106.
]</i></p>




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Apply N2772 to the WP.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1442"></a>1442. [FCD] "happens-before" should be "synchronizes-with"</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30 [thread] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Canada <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-18</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1443">1443</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses CA-9, GB-122</b></p>

<p><i>[CA-9:]</i></p>


Imposed happens-before edges should be in
synchronizes-with<br>
Each use of the words "happens-before" should be
replaced with the words "synchronizes-with" in the
following sentences:<br>
27.2.3p2<br>
30.3.1.2p6<br>
30.3.1.5p7<br>
30.6.4p7<br>
30.6.9p5<br>
30.6.10.1p23<br>
Rationale: Happens-before is defined in 1.10p11 in a way
that (deliberately) does not make it explicitly transitively
closed. Adding edges to happens-before directly, as in
27.2.3p2 etc., does not provide transitivity with
sequenced-before or any other existing happens-before
edge. This lack of transitivity seems to be unintentional.

<p><i>[GB-122]</i></p>


<p>At various points in the standard new edges are added to
happens-before, for example 27.2.3:2 adds happens-before edges between
writes and reads from a stream:</p>

<p>If one thread makes a library call a that writes a value to a
stream and, as a result, another thread reads this value from the
stream through a library call b such that this does not result in a
data race, then a happens before b.</p>

<p>Happens-before is defined in 1.10:11 in a deliberate way that makes it
not explicitly transitively closed. Adding edges to happens-before
directly, as in 27.2.3:2, does not provide transitivity with
sequenced-before or any other existing happens-before edge. This lack
of transitivity seems to be unintentional. In order to achieve
transitivity we suggest each edge be added to
inter-thread-happens-before as a synchronises-with edge (as per
conversation with Hans Boehm). In the standard, each use of the words
"happens-before" should be replaced with the words "synchronizes-with"
in the following sentences:</p>

<p>27.2.3:2,
30.3.1.2:6,
30.3.1.5:7,
30.6.4:7,
30.6.9:5,
30.6.10.1:23</p>

<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>

<p><i>[Beman provided specific wording for the proposed resolution.]</i></p>


<p>Change 27.2.3 Thread Safety [iostreams.threadsafety] paragraph 2:</p>

<p>If one thread makes a library call <tt>a</tt> that writes a value to a stream and, as a result, another thread reads this value from the stream through a library call <tt>b</tt> such that this does not result in a data race, then <tt>a</tt> <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> <tt>b</tt>.</p>

<p>Change 30.3.1.2 thread constructors [thread.thread.constr] paragraph 6:</p>

<p><i>Synchronization:</i> The invocation of the constructor <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> the invocation of the copy of <tt>f</tt>.</p>

<p>Change 30.3.1.5 thread members [thread.thread.member] paragraph 7:</p>

<p><i>Synchronization:</i> The completion of the thread represented by <tt>*this</tt> <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> (1.10) <tt>join()</tt> <del>returns</del> <ins>returning</ins>. [ Note: Operations on <tt>*this</tt> are not synchronized. --end note ]</p>

<p>Change 30.6.4 Associated asynchronous state [futures.state] paragraph 7:</p>

<p>Calls to functions that successfully set the stored result of an associated asynchronous state synchronize
with (1.10) calls to functions successfully detecting the ready state resulting from that setting. The storage of the result (whether normal or exceptional) into the associated asynchronous state <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> (1.10) that state <del>is</del> <ins>being</ins> set to ready.</p>

<p>Change 30.6.9 Function template async [futures.async] paragraph 5:</p>

<p><i>Synchronization:</i> the invocation of <tt>async</tt> <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> (1.10) the invocation of <tt>f</tt>. [ Note: this
statement applies even when the corresponding future object is moved to another thread. --end
note ] If the invocation is not deferred, a call to a waiting function on an asynchronous return object
that shares the associated asynchronous state created by this async call shall block until the associated
thread has completed. If the invocation is not deferred, the <tt>join()</tt> on the created thread <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins>
(1.10) the first function that successfully detects the ready status of the associated asynchronous
state returns or before the function that gives up the last reference to the associated asynchronous
state returns, whichever happens first. If the invocation is deferred, the completion of the invocation
of the deferred function <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> the calls to the waiting functions return.</p>

<p>Change 30.6.10.1 packaged_task member functions [futures.task.members] paragraph 23:</p>

<p><i>Synchronization:</i> a successful call to <tt>operator()</tt> synchronizes with (1.10) a call to any member function of a <tt>future</tt>, <tt>shared_future</tt>, or <tt>atomic_future</tt> object that shares the associated asynchronous
state of <tt>*this</tt>. The completion of the invocation of the stored task and the storage of the result
(whether normal or exceptional) into the associated asynchronous state <del>happens before</del> <ins>synchronizes with</ins> (1.10) the
state <del>is</del> <ins>being</ins> set to ready. [ Note: <tt>operator()</tt> synchronizes and serializes with other functions through the
associated asynchronous state. �end note ]</p>






<hr>
<h3><a name="1443"></a>1443. [FCD] Imposed happens-before edges are not made transitive</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30 [thread] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-27</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#1442">1442</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>


<p><b>Addresses GB-122</b></p>

<p>At various points in the standard new edges are added to
happens-before, for example 27.2.3:2 adds happens-before edges between
writes and reads from a stream:</p>

<p>If one thread makes a library call a that writes a value to a
stream and, as a result, another thread reads this value from the
stream through a library call b such that this does not result in a
data race, then a happens before b.</p>

<p>Happens-before is defined in 1.10:11 in a deliberate way that makes it
not explicitly transitively closed. Adding edges to happens-before
directly, as in 27.2.3:2, does not provide transitivity with
sequenced-before or any other existing happens-before edge. This lack
of transitivity seems to be unintentional. In order to achieve
transitivity we suggest each edge be added to
inter-thread-happens-before as a synchronises-with edge (as per
conversation with Hans Boehm). In the standard, each use of the words
"happens-before" should be replaced with the words "synchronizes-with"
in the following sentences:</p>

<p>27.2.3:2,
30.3.1.2:6,
30.3.1.5:7,
30.6.4:7,
30.6.9:5,
30.6.10.1:23</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Request the concurrency working group to
determine if changes are needed





<hr>
<h3><a name="1444"></a>1444. [FCD] <tt>OFF_T</tt> is not defined</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-28</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1414">1414</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses GB-123</b></p>

Several rows in table 124 specify a Return type of
'OFF_T', which does not appear to be a type defined in
this standard.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Resolve outstanding references to the removed
type 'OFF_T'.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1446"></a>1446. [FCD] Move and swap for I/O streams</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#NAD">NAD</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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-138</b></p>

For istreams and ostreams, the move-constructor does
not move-construct, the move-assignment operator does
not move-assign, and the swap function does not swap
because these operations do not manage the <tt>rdbuf()</tt>
pointer. Useful applications of these operations are
prevented both by their incorrect semantics and because
they are protected.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
In short: reverse the resolution of issue 900, then
change the semantics to move and swap the
<tt>rdbuf()</tt> pointer. Add a new protected constructor
that takes an rvalue reference to a stream and a
pointer to a streambuf, a new protected <tt>assign()</tt>
operator that takes the same arguments, and a
new protected <tt>partial_swap()</tt> function that doesn't
swap <tt>rdbuf()</tt>.
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/n3179.pdf">n3179</a> would solve this issue.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010-11 Batavia
]</i></p>

<p>
Closed as NAD.
</p>
<blockquote>
The Library Working Group reviewed <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3179.pdf">n3179</a> and 
concluded that this change alone was not sufficient, as it would require changes to some of the derived stream types in the library.  
The preference is to not make such a broad fix, and retain the current semantics. This is closed as NAD rather than NAD future as it 
will be difficult to rename the new functions introduced in the C++0x revision of the standard at a later date.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1451"></a>1451. [FCD] <tt>regex</tt> should support allocators</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#Dup">Dup</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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1396">1396</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US-141</b></p>

std::basic_regex should have an allocator for all the
reasons that a std::string does. For example, I can use
boost::interprocess to put a string or vector in shared
memory, but not a regex.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Add allocators to regexes; see paper <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3171.pdf">N3171</a>
in the pre-Batavia mailing.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1454"></a>1454. [FCD] Ensure C 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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <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">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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1455">1455</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses GB-128</b></p>
<p>
WG14 has made some late changes to their specification
of atomics, and care should be taken to ensure that we
retain a common subset of language/library syntax to
declare headers that are portable to both languages.
Ideally, such headers would not require users to define
their own macros, especially not macros that map to
keywords (which remains undefined behaviour)
</p>


<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Depends on result of the review of WG14 work,
which is expected to be out to ballot during the
time wg21 is resolving its own ballot comments.
Liaison may also want to file comments in WG14
to ensure compatibity from both sides.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1458"></a>1458. [FCD] Overlapping evaluations are allowed</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-26</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1459">1459</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses GB-131</b></p>

29.4 [atomics.lockfree] p.8 states:
<p></p><blockquote>
An atomic store shall only store a value that has been computed
from constants and program input values by a finite sequence of
program evaluations, such that each evaluation observes the values
of variables as computed by the last prior assignment in the
sequence.
</blockquote><p></p>
<p>
... but 1.9 [intro.execution] p.13 states:
</p>
<p></p><blockquote>
If A is not sequenced before B and B is not sequenced before A,
then A and B are unsequenced. [ <em>Note</em>: The execution of unsequenced
evaluations can overlap. � <em>end note</em> ]
</blockquote><p></p>
<p>
Overlapping executions can make it impossible to construct the sequence
described in 29.4 [atomics.lockfree] p.8. We are not sure of the intention here and do not
offer a suggestion for change, but note that 29.4 [atomics.lockfree] p.8 is the condition
that prevents out-of-thin-air reads.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Request the concurrency working group to
determine if changes are needed. Consider
changing the use of "sequence" in 29.4 [atomics.lockfree]





<hr>
<h3><a name="1463"></a>1463. [FCD] Inconsistent value assignment for <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#Dup">Dup</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#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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#1462">1462</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US-157</b></p>

<tt>atomic_bool</tt> has a <tt>volatile</tt> assignment operator but not a
non-<tt>volatile</tt> operator. The other integral types have both.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Add a non-volatile assignment operator to <tt>atomic_bool</tt>.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1470"></a>1470. [FCD] "Same-ness" curiosities</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1474">1474</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-165</b></p>

According to 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 23:
<p></p><blockquote>
�is the same that same as that of� is not grammatical (and is not clear)
</blockquote><p></p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1471"></a>1471. [FCD] Default constructor of atomics needs specification</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-18</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-168</b></p>

29.6 [atomics.types.operations] around p. 4: The definition of the default constructor needs exposition.


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Insert a new general prototype description following the current 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 3 as indicated:
<p>
</p>
<blockquote>
3 [<em>Note</em>: Many operations are volatile-qualified. The �volatile as device register� semantics have not changed
in the standard. This qualification means that volatility is preserved when applying these operations to
volatile objects. It does not mean that operations on non-volatile objects become volatile. Thus, volatile
qualified operations on non-volatile objects may be merged under some conditions. -- <em>end note</em>]
</blockquote>
<blockquote><pre><ins>A::A() = default;</ins>
</pre><blockquote>
<ins>? <em>Effects</em>: Leaves the atomic object in an uninitialized state.
[<em>Note</em>: These semantics ensure compatiblity with <tt>C</tt>. -- <em>end note</em>]</ins>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote><pre>constexpr A::A(C desired);
[..]
</pre></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1472"></a>1472. [FCD] Incorrect semantics of <tt>atomic_init</tt></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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-171</b></p>

As of 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 7:
<p>
The <tt>atomic_init</tt> definition "Non-atomically assigns the
value" is not quite correct, as the <tt>atomic_init</tt> purpose is
initialization.


</p><p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
Change  29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 7 as indicated:
<blockquote><pre>void atomic_init(volatile A *object, C desired);
void atomic_init(A *object, C desired);
</pre><blockquote>
7 <em>Effects</em>: <del>Non-atomically assigns the value desired to <tt>*object</tt></del><ins>Initializes <tt>*object</tt> with value
<tt>desired</tt></ins>. Concurrent access from another thread, even via an atomic operation, constitutes a data race.
<ins>[<em>Note</em>: This function should only be applied to objects that have been default constructed. These semantics ensure
compatibility with <tt>C</tt>. � <em>end note</em>]</ins>
</blockquote></blockquote>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1473"></a>1473. [FCD] Incomplete memory order specifications</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#NAD">NAD</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <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#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#NAD">NAD</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-172</b></p>

As of 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 9, 13, 17, 20:
<p>
The order specifications are incomplete because the non-<tt>_explicit</tt>
functions do not have such parameters.
</p><p>
Add a new sentence: "If the program does not specify an order, it shall be
<tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>." Or perhaps: "The non-_explicit
non-member functions shall affect memory as though they were _explicit with
<tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>."


</p><p><i>[
2010 Batavia
]</i></p>

<p>
The Concurrency subgroup reviewed this, and deemed it NAD according to
29.6 [atomics.types.operations] paragraph 2, bullet 4. 
</p>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>The working paper is correct as written.



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 9 as indicated:
<blockquote><pre>void atomic_store(volatile A* object, C desired);
void atomic_store(A* object, C desired);
void atomic_store_explicit(volatile A *object, C desired, memory_order order);
void atomic_store_explicit(A* object, C desired, memory_order order);
void A::store(C desired, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;
void A::store(C desired, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst);
</pre><blockquote>
8 <em>Requires</em>: The order argument shall not be <tt>memory_order_consume</tt>, <tt>memory_order_acquire</tt>, nor
<tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>.
<p>
9 <em>Effects</em>: Atomically replaces the value pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by this with the value of <tt>desired</tt>.
Memory is affected according to the value of <tt>order</tt>. <ins>If the program does not specify an order, it shall be
<tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>.</ins>
</p></blockquote></blockquote>
</li>
<li>Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 13 as indicated:
<blockquote><pre>C atomic_load(const volatile A* object);
C atomic_load(const A* object);
C atomic_load_explicit(const volatile A* object, memory_order);
C atomic_load_explicit(const A* object, memory_order);
C A::load(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) const volatile;
C A::load(memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) const;
</pre><blockquote>
12 <em>Requires</em>: The order argument shall not be <tt>memory_order_release</tt> nor <tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>.
<p>
13 <em>Effects</em>: Memory is affected according to the value of <tt>order</tt>. <ins>If the program does not specify an order, it shall be
<tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>.</ins>
</p><p>
14 <em>Returns</em>: Atomically returns the value pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt>.
</p></blockquote></blockquote>
</li>
<li>Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 17 as indicated:
<blockquote><pre>C atomic_exchange(volatile A* object, C desired);
C atomic_exchange(A* object, C desired);
C atomic_exchange_explicit(volatile A* object, C desired, memory_order);
C atomic_exchange_explicit(A* object, C desired, memory_order);
C A::exchange(C desired, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;
C A::exchange(C desired, memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst);
</pre><blockquote>
17 <em>Effects</em>: Atomically replaces the value pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt> with <tt>desired</tt>. Memory
is affected according to the value of <tt>order</tt>. These operations are atomic read-modify-write operations
(1.10). <ins>If the program does not specify an order, it shall be <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>.</ins>
<p>
18 <em>Returns</em>: Atomically returns the value pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt> immediately before the effects.
</p></blockquote></blockquote>
</li>
<li>Change 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 20 as indicated:
<blockquote><pre>bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak(volatile A* object, C * expected, C desired);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak(A* object, C * expected, C desired);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong(volatile A* object, C * expected, C desired);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong(A* object, C * expected, C desired);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(volatile A* object, C * expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(A* object, C * expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(volatile A* object, C * expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure);
bool atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(A* object, C * expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure);
bool A::compare_exchange_weak(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure) volatile;
bool A::compare_exchange_weak(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure);
bool A::compare_exchange_strong(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure) volatile;
bool A::compare_exchange_strong(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order success, memory_order failure);
bool A::compare_exchange_weak(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;
bool A::compare_exchange_weak(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst);
bool A::compare_exchange_strong(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;
bool A::compare_exchange_strong(C &amp; expected, C desired,
  memory_order order = memory_order_seq_cst);
</pre><blockquote>
19 <em>Requires</em>: The <tt>failure</tt> argument shall not be <tt>memory_order_release</tt> nor <tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt>.
The <tt>failure</tt> argument shall be no stronger than the success argument.
<p>
20 <em>Effects</em>: Atomically, compares the contents of the memory pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt> for equality
with that in <tt>expected</tt>, and if true, replaces the contents of the memory pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by
<tt>this</tt> with that in <tt>desired</tt>, and if false, updates the contents of the memory in expected with the
contents of the memory pointed to by <tt>object</tt> or by <tt>this</tt>. Further, if the comparison is true, memory
is affected according to the value of <tt>success</tt>, and if the comparison is false, memory is affected
according to the value of <tt>failure</tt>. When only one <tt>memory_order</tt> argument is supplied, the value of
<tt>success</tt> is <tt>order</tt>, and the value of <tt>failure</tt> is <tt>order</tt> except that a value of 
<tt>memory_order_acq_rel</tt> shall be replaced by the value <tt>memory_order_acquire</tt> and a value of 
<tt>memory_order_release</tt> shall be replaced by the value <tt>memory_order_relaxed</tt>. <ins>If 
the program does not specify an order, it shall be <tt>memory_order_seq_cst</tt>.</ins> If the operation returns <tt>true</tt>, 
these operations are atomic read-modify-write operations (1.10). Otherwise, these operations are atomic load operations.
</p><p>
[..]
</p></blockquote></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1475"></a>1475. [FCD] weak compare-and-exchange confusion II</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1474">1474</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses CH-23</b></p>

29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p. 23: The first sentence has non-English syntax.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed in ballot comment:
]</i></p>


<p>
Change to "The weak compare-and-exchange
operations may fail spuriously, that is, return false
while leaving the contents of memory pointed to
by expected unchanged."
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1476"></a>1476. [FCD] Ballot Comment US-177</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-07</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1474">1474</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>

<p><b>Addresses US-177</b></p>

The first sentence of this paragraph doesn't make sense.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed in ballot comment
]</i></p>

<p>
Figure out what it's supposed to say, and say it.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1477"></a>1477. [FCD] weak compare-and-exchange confusion III</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#Dup">Dup</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> BSI <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-31</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#Dup">Dup</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Duplicate of:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#1474">1474</a></p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses GB-135</b></p>

The first sentence of 29.6 [atomics.types.operations] p.23 was changed by n2992 but
now makes no sense: "that is, return <tt>false</tt> while leaving
the contents of memory pointed to by <tt>expected</tt> before the
operation is the same that same as that of the <tt>object</tt> and
the same as that of <tt>expected</tt> after the operation."
There's a minor editorial difference between n2992 ("is
that same as that" vs "is the same that same as that") but
neither version makes sense.
Also, the remark talks about "<tt>object</tt>" which should
probably be "<tt>object</tt> or <tt>this</tt>" to cover the member functions
which have no object parameter.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed in ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
Fix the Remark to say whatever was intended.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1483"></a>1483. [FCD] <tt>__STDCPP_THREADS spelling</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3 [thread.threads] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> DIN <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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses DE-23</b></p>

Predefined macros usually start and end with two
underscores, see 16.8 and FDIS 29124 = WG21 N3060
clause 7. __STDCPP_THREADS should blend in.

<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 the macro name to
__STDCPP_THREADS__.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1484"></a>1484. [FCD] Need a way to join a thread with a timeout</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.3.1 [thread.thread.class] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Future">NAD Future</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-183</b></p>

There is no way to join a thread with a timeout.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Add <tt>join_for</tt> and <tt>join_until</tt>. Or decide one should
never join a thread with a timeout since <tt>pthread_join</tt> doesn't have a 
timeout version.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Batavia
]</i></p>

<p>
The concurrency working group deemed this an extension beyond the scope of C++0x.
</p>
<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>The LWG does not wish to make a change at this time.



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1488"></a>1488. [FCD] Improve interoperability between
the C++0x and C1x threads APIs</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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">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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-185</b></p>

Cooperate with WG14 to improve interoperability between
the <tt>C++0x</tt> and <tt>C1x</tt> threads APIs. In particular, <tt>C1x</tt>
mutexes should be conveniently usable with a <tt>C++0x</tt>
<tt>lock_guard</tt>. Performance overheads for this combination
should be considered.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Remove <tt>C++0x</tt> <tt>timed_mutex</tt> and
<tt>timed_recursive_mutex</tt> if that facilitates
development of more compatible APIs.
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Batavia
]</i></p>

<p>
The concurrency sub-group reviewed the options, and decided that closer harmony should wait until both standards are published.
</p>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>
The LWG does not wish to make any change at this time.




<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1489"></a>1489. [FCD] <tt>unlock</tt> functions and unlock
mutex requirements are inconsistent</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses CH-26</b></p>

Specifications of <tt>unlock</tt> member functions and <tt>unlock</tt>
mutex requirements are inconsistent wrt to exceptions and
pre- and postconditions.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
<tt>unlock</tt> should specifiy the precondition that the
current thread "owns the lock", this will make calls
without holding the locks "undefined behavior".
<tt>unlock</tt> in  [mutex.requirements] should either be
<tt>noexcept(true)</tt> or be allowed to throw
<tt>system_error</tt> like <tt>unique_lock::unlock</tt>, or the latter
should be <tt>nothrow(true)</tt> and have the precondition
<tt>owns == true</tt>.
Furthermore <tt>unique_lock</tt>'s postcondition is wrong
in the case of a recursive mutex where <tt>owns</tt>
might stay true, when it is not the last <tt>unlock</tt>
needed to be called.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1493"></a>1493. [FCD] Add <tt>mutex</tt>, <tt>recursive_mutex</tt>, <tt>is_locked</tt> function</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-189</b></p>

<tt>mutex</tt> and <tt>recursive_mutex</tt> should have an <tt>is_locked()</tt>
member function. <tt>is_locked</tt> allows a user to test a lock
without acquiring it and can be used to implement a lightweight
<tt>try_try_lock</tt>.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Add a member function:
<pre>bool is_locked() const;
</pre>
to <tt>std::mutex</tt> and <tt>std::recursive_mutex</tt>. These
functions return true if the current thread would
not be able to obtain a mutex. These functions do
not synchronize with anything (and, thus, can
avoid a memory fence).
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Batavia
]</i></p>

<p>
The Concurrency subgroup reviewed this issue and deemed it to be an extension to be handled after publishing C++0x.
</p>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>The LWG does not wish to make a change at this time.



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1495"></a>1495. [FCD] Condition variable <tt>wait_for</tt> return insufficient</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-191</b></p>

The condition variable <tt>wait_for</tt> returning <tt>cv_status</tt> is insufficient.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Return a duration of timeout remaining instead.
See Appendix 1 of <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3141.pdf">n3141</a> - Additional Details, p. 211
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1496"></a>1496. [FCD] <tt>condition_variable</tt> not implementable</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses CH-28</b></p>

Requiring wait_until makes it impossible to implement
condition_variable correctly using respective objects
provided by the operating system (i.e. implementing the
native_handle() function) on many platforms (e.g. POSIX,
Windows, MacOS X) or using the same object as for the
condition variable proposed for C.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<blockquote>
Remove the <tt>wait_until</tt> functions or make them at least conditionally supported.
</blockquote>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1499"></a>1499. [FCD] Condition variables preclude wakeup optimization</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#NAD Future">NAD Future</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.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#NAD Future">NAD Future</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-193</b></p>

Condition variables preclude a wakeup optimization.

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
Change condition_variable to allow such
optimization. See Appendix 1 - Additional Details
</blockquote>

<p><i>[
2010 Batavia
]</i></p>

<p>
The Concurrency subgroup reviewed the issue, and deemed it an extension to be handled after C++0x.
</p>

<p><b>Rationale:</b></p>The LWG does not wish to make the change at this time.



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1500"></a>1500. [FCD] Consider removal of <tt>native_handle()</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> Switzerland <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-10-28</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#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses CH-32</b></p>

Given that the lock type can be something the underlying
doesn't know 'native_handle()' is probably
unimplementable on essentially all platforms.

<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>
Consider the removal of 'native_handle()'.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1506"></a>1506. [FCD] set_exception with a null pointer</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.5 [futures.promise] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-04</p>
<p><b>View other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index-open.html#futures.promise">active issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.promise">issues</a> in [futures.promise].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-198</b></p>

promise::set_exception can be called with a null pointer,
but none of the descriptions of the get() functions for the
three types of futures say what happens for this case.

<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 the following sentence to the end of
30.6.5/22: The behavior of a program that calls
set_exception with a null pointer is undefined.





<hr>
<h3><a name="1509"></a>1509. [FCD] No restriction on calling <tt>future::get</tt> more than once</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.atomic_future">issues</a> in [futures.atomic_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-202</b></p>
<p>
The note in this paragraph says "unlike <tt>future</tt>, calling <tt>get</tt>
more than once on the same <tt>atomic_future</tt> object is well
defined and produces the result again." There is nothing
in <tt>future</tt> that says anything negative about calling <tt>get</tt>
more than once.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
Remove this note, or add words to the
requirements for future that reflect what this note
says.
</p>


<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1510"></a>1510. [FCD] Should be undefined behaviour to call <tt>atomic_future</tt> operations unless <tt>valid()</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.atomic_future">issues</a> in [futures.atomic_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-203</b></p>
<p>
Both <tt>future</tt> and <tt>shared_future</tt> specify that calling most
member functions on an object for which <tt>valid() == false</tt>
produces undefined behavior. There is no such statement
for <tt>atomic_future</tt>.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
Add a new paragraph after 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future]/2 with the same words as
30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]/3.
</p>

<p><i>[
2010-11-02 Daniel translates proposed changes into specific deltas and comments:
]</i></p>


<blockquote>
While applying the wording, I notice that 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]/3 does
speak of the move-assignment operator, and <em>not</em> of the copy-assignment operator.
<tt>atomic_future</tt> obviously needs this to be true for the copy-assignment operator,
but I strongly assume that <tt>shared_future</tt> needs to mention both special member
assignment operators in this paragraph. To keep this consistent, the following P/R also
provides wording to fix the corresponding location for <tt>shared_future</tt>.
</blockquote>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>Change 30.6.7 [futures.shared_future]/3 as indicated:
<blockquote>
3 The effect of calling any member function other than the destructor<ins>, the 
copy-assignment operator</ins>, the move-assignment operator, or <tt>valid()</tt> 
on a <tt>shared_future</tt> object for which <tt>valid() == false</tt> is undefined.
</blockquote>
</li>
<li>Following 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future]/2, add a new paragraph:
<blockquote>
<ins>? The effect of calling any member function other than the destructor, the copy-assignment operator, or <tt>valid()</tt>
on a <tt>atomic_future</tt> object for which <tt>valid() == false</tt> is undefined.</ins>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1511"></a>1511. [FCD] Synchronize the move-constructor for <tt>atomic_future</tt></h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.8 [futures.atomic_future] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.atomic_future">issues</a> in [futures.atomic_future].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-204</b></p>
<p>
According to the definition of <tt>atomic_future</tt>, all members
of <tt>atomic_future</tt> are synchronizing except constructors.
However, it would probably be appropriate for a move
constructor to be synchronizing on the source object. If
not, the postconditions on paragraphs 7-8, might not be
satisfied. This may be applicable if a collection of futures
are being doled out to a set of threads that process their
value.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
Make the move constructor for atomic future lock
the source
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>





<hr>
<h3><a name="1512"></a>1512. [FCD] Conflict in spec: block or join?</h3>
<p><b>Section:</b> 30.6.9 [futures.async] <b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a>
 <b>Submitter:</b> INCITS <b>Opened:</b> 2010-08-25 <b>Last modified:</b> 2010-11-12</p>
<p><b>View all other</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-index.html#futures.async">issues</a> in [futures.async].</p>
<p><b>View all issues with</b> <a href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-status.html#NAD Editorial">NAD Editorial</a> status.</p>
<p><b>Discussion:</b></p>
<p><b>Addresses US-205</b></p>
<p>
30.6.9 [futures.async] p. 3: The third sentence says 
"If the invocation is not deferred, a call to a waiting function 
on an asynchronous return object that shares the associated asynchronous state
created by this <tt>async</tt> call shall block until the associated
thread has completed." The next sentence says "If the
invocation is not deferred, the <tt>join()</tt> on the created
thread..." Blocking until a thread completes is not
necessarily a join.
</p>

<p><i>[
Resolution proposed by ballot comment:
]</i></p>

<p>
Decide whether the requirement is to block until
finished or to call join, and rewrite to match.
</p>



<p><b>Proposed resolution:</b></p>







</body></html>
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.25.1) at 2024-07-03 19:06:02 +0000