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
P2165R4 Compatibility between tuple and tuple-like objects #5694
Conversation
8caef37
to
f9044a5
Compare
56d9b92
to
8712457
Compare
45e1a7b
to
bc09bd6
Compare
@jwakely, @cor3ntin: Could you please comment on the Editor's Note in the paper that asks whether we need to modify the container requirements, and says,
|
@tkoeppe Sorry, I guess i should have removed that note, it was more "lwg should discuss that" rather than actual editor guidance. I don't actually remember that it was discussed though. I don't think there is an issue here either way, I'm struggling to imagine a case where |
@cor3ntin: Thank you! I'll proceed as-is then, and we can follow up via issues later if and when necessary. |
bc09bd6
to
a139043
Compare
I will add a corresponding addition to that motion when we get to it; for now, this paper is applied in its entirety. |
a139043
to
14af04f
Compare
Editorial changes: * Added cross references in [tuple.rel] pointing at [basic.lookup.argdep]. * Addedd cross reference in [pairs.pair] pointing at [range.utility.helpers] for "different-from". * Reworded section title in [tuple.common.ref]. * Added references in synopsis.
14af04f
to
3d24612
Compare
Also resolves cplusplus/papers#876. |
Fixes #5599
The 2nd part of this (replacing all usages of tuple-or-pair by tuple in the range clause) should be applied after P2374R4 #5605 as per the Editor's note at end of P2165R4.