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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[intro.object] The term "potentially-overlapping subobject" doesn't seem to exclude reference members #6158

Open
frederick-vs-ja opened this issue Mar 4, 2023 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #6160
Open

[intro.object] The term "potentially-overlapping subobject" doesn't seem to exclude reference members #6158

frederick-vs-ja opened this issue Mar 4, 2023 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #6160

Comments

@frederick-vs-ja
Copy link
Contributor

no_unique_address can be applied to non-static reference data members, which is needed for ranges::minmax.

However, the current wording seemingly implies that a non-static data member of a reference type declared with [[no_unique_address]] would also be a "potentially-overlapping subobject" even if it can't be a subobject.
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Any suggestions how to fix that?

@frederick-vs-ja frederick-vs-ja linked a pull request Mar 5, 2023 that will close this issue
Open
@frederick-vs-ja
Copy link
Contributor Author

Any suggestions how to fix that?

I've submitted the PR. cplusplus/CWG#254 may be related, but I think this can be resolved editorially.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

[intro.object] References are not potentially-overlapping subobjects frederick-vs-ja/draft
2 participants
@frederick-vs-ja @jensmaurer