Skip to content
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

[meta.member] Clarify is_corresponding_member semantics #4768

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 22, 2021

Conversation

jwakely
Copy link
Member

@jwakely jwakely commented Jul 21, 2021

The definition of 'common initial sequence' in [class.mem] only applies
to standard-layout struct types, which excludes unions. There is no
reason to define is_corresponding_member in terms of standard-layout
types (which includes unions and scalars and arrays of such types) when
the common initial sequence is only meaningful for standard-layout
structs.

The definition of 'common initial sequence' in [class.mem] only applies
to standard-layout struct types, which excludes unions. There is no
reason to define is_corresponding_member in terms of standard-layout
types (which includes unions and scalars and arrays of such types) when
the common initial sequence is only meaningful for standard-layout
structs.
@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit 1d263a8 into cplusplus:main Jul 22, 2021
@jwakely jwakely deleted the is_corresponding_member branch August 12, 2021 09:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants