Skip to content

[CWG 3] P2796R0 CWG2518 Conformance requirements and #error/#warning #6120

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 5, 2023

Conversation

burblebee
Copy link
Contributor

@burblebee burblebee commented Feb 15, 2023

@burblebee burblebee marked this pull request as ready for review February 15, 2023 17:32
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to the post-2023-02 milestone Feb 16, 2023
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the changes requested Changes to the wording or approach have been requested and not yet applied. label Feb 19, 2023
@burblebee burblebee force-pushed the motions-2023-02-cwg-3 branch from 3501bab to 7643924 Compare February 21, 2023 22:04
@burblebee burblebee removed the changes requested Changes to the wording or approach have been requested and not yet applied. label Feb 21, 2023
@burblebee burblebee requested review from JohelEGP and jensmaurer and removed request for JohelEGP February 21, 2023 22:11
@burblebee burblebee requested a review from JohelEGP February 28, 2023 04:52
@tkoeppe tkoeppe force-pushed the motions-2023-02-cwg-3 branch from 99116b3 to b3886b8 Compare March 5, 2023 17:26
or the expression is evaluated in the context of a template definition,
the declaration has no
effect. Otherwise,
%FIXME: What does it mean for a grammar term to fail? Also in [temp.res]/p6.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't this text the definition of what it means for the static_assert-declaration to fail?

@jensmaurer, any thoughts? I think this seems clear?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, that's the intent: We defined "fails" here.

Note that the proposed resolution in CWG2518 marks "fails" in italics to highlight the fact this is a term definition.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not in italics in this PR. Also, does #6120 (comment), which made "int" into int, makes sense if the error comment is supposed to be a reproduction of the string-literal to the static_assert?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, good catch, we need to italicise fails, thank you!

@tkoeppe tkoeppe force-pushed the motions-2023-02-cwg-3 branch from b3886b8 to b334df6 Compare March 5, 2023 17:31
@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit 7452792 into main Mar 5, 2023
@tkoeppe tkoeppe deleted the motions-2023-02-cwg-3 branch May 10, 2023 17:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants