Created on 2021-09-29.00:00:00 last changed 7 days ago
This wording is relative to N4892.
Modify [range.iota.view] as indicated:
constexpr auto size() const requires see below;
-15- Effects: Equivalent to:if constexpr (is-integer-like<W> && is-integer-like<Bound>) return (value_ < 0) ? ((bound_ < 0) ? to-unsigned-like(-value_) - to-unsigned-like(-bound_) : to-unsigned-like(bound_) + to-unsigned-like(-value_)) : to-unsigned-like(bound_) - to-unsigned-like(value_); else return to-unsigned-like(bound_ - value_);
-16- Remarks: The expression in the requires-clause is equivalent to:(same_as<W, Bound> && advanceable<W>) || (
integral<W> && integral<Bound>) || sized_sentinel_for<Bound, W>
[ 2021-10-14; Reflector poll ]
Set status to Tentatively Ready after six votes in favour during reflector poll.
It seems that the iota_view tends to accept integer-class types as its value types, by using is-integer-like or is-signed-integer-like through the specification, although it's unspecified whether any of them satisfies weakly_incrementable. However, the requires-clause of iota_view::size ([range.iota.view] p16) uses (integral<W> && integral<Bound>), which sometimes rejects integer-class types.Should we relax the restrictions by changing this part to (is-integer-like<W> && is-integer-like<Bound>)?
|2021-10-14 11:35:22||admin||set||messages: + msg12150|
|2021-10-14 11:35:22||admin||set||status: new -> ready|
|2021-10-03 13:27:56||admin||set||messages: + msg12092|