Created on 2024-05-01.00:00:00 last changed 5 months ago
Proposed resolution:
This wording is relative to N4986.
Modify [common.iterator] as indicated:
namespace std { template<input_or_output_iterator I, sentinel_for<I> S> requires (!same_as<I, S> && copyable<I>) class common_iterator { public: […] template<classcommon_with<I> I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y); template<classcommon_with<I> I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> && equality_comparable_with<I, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y); […] }; […] }
Modify [common.iter.cmp] as indicated:
template<classcommon_with<I> I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y);-1- Preconditions: x.v_.valueless_by_exception() and y.v_.valueless_by_exception() are each false.
[…]template<classcommon_with<I> I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> && equality_comparable_with<I, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y);-3- Preconditions: x.v_.valueless_by_exception() and y.v_.valueless_by_exception() are each false.
[…]
[ 2024-07-09; Hewill provides improved wording ]
[ 2024-06-24; Reflector poll ]
Set priority to 3 after reflector poll. Seems unlikely to be a problem in practice. Proposed resolution would make the two `operator==` overloads ambiguous.
This wording is relative to N4981.
Modify [common.iterator] as indicated:
namespace std { template<input_or_output_iterator I, sentinel_for<I> S> requires (!same_as<I, S> && copyable<I>) class common_iterator { public: […] template<classcommon_with<I> I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y); […] }; […] }
Modify [common.iter.cmp] as indicated:
template<classcommon_with<I> I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y);-1- Preconditions: x.v_.valueless_by_exception() and y.v_.valueless_by_exception() are each false.
[…]
common_iterator has the following equality operator:
template<class I2, sentinel_for<I> S2> requires sentinel_for<S, I2> friend constexpr bool operator==( const common_iterator& x, const common_iterator<I2, S2>& y);
which is quite useful when wrapping a C++20 input_iterator that does not model equality_comparable so that the quality operator required by the Cpp17InputIterator can still be synthesized.
However, the function signature does not check the correlation between I2 and I, which allows a common_iterator wrapping two completely unrelated iterators to validly compare (demo):
common_iterator<string::iterator, unreachable_sentinel_t> i1;
common_iterator<list<int>::iterator, unreachable_sentinel_t> i2;
i1 == i2; // unfortunately compile
The proposed resolution requires common_with<I, I2> to be satisfied to enhance semantics, which is also consistent with the signature of counted_iterator::operator==.
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2024-07-21 08:40:42 | admin | set | messages: + msg14252 |
2024-06-24 12:09:57 | admin | set | messages: + msg14187 |
2024-05-05 08:58:05 | admin | set | messages: + msg14107 |
2024-05-01 00:00:00 | admin | create |