-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Closed
cplusplus/draft
#6116Labels
C++23Targeted at C++23Targeted at C++23ISShip vehicle: ISShip vehicle: ISLWGLibraryLibraryformatplenary-approvedPapers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote.Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote.tentatively-ready-for-plenaryReviewed between meetings; ready for a vote.Reviewed between meetings; ready for a vote.
Milestone
Description
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3810
LWG would like design guidance here. Should CTAD work? It's currently sort-of implied it should, but only if you assume that the exposition-only types and constructors are implemented exactly as shown. If the format-arg-store-type is defined as a nested type of basic_format_args (as in libstdc++) then it doesn't work.
There's an example from Tomasz in the issue showing a case where CTAD might be useful, but Victor suggested we should explicitly disable CTAD here, because it makes it easier to create dangling references.
Reactions are currently unavailable
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
C++23Targeted at C++23Targeted at C++23ISShip vehicle: ISShip vehicle: ISLWGLibraryLibraryformatplenary-approvedPapers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote.Papers approved for inclusion in their target vehicle by plenary vote.tentatively-ready-for-plenaryReviewed between meetings; ready for a vote.Reviewed between meetings; ready for a vote.
Type
Projects
Status
Ready