[expr.prim.req.general] Correct the IFNDR example #6062
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
CaseyCarter
approved these changes
Jan 25, 2023
|
@jensmaurer, any thoughts on the quality of the replacement example? |
jensmaurer
approved these changes
Nov 8, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #6055.
The old example is made well-formed by CWG2392. And it's doubtful whether it was definitely correct before CWG2392, as an implementation may allow a large object type
Tsuch that(int)sizeof(T)is equal to0.The expression
new decltype((void)T{})used by this PR is guaranteed to be ill-formed and thus makes the program IFNDR - eitherT{}is ill-formed, or the expression is equivalent tonew voidwhich is ill-formed.