-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
P1673R12: LWG comments from chat #390
Comments
7 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Varna 2023 LWG comments from chat
Regarding abs, conj, imag, and real
LWG was concerned about the following wording in [linalg.general].
A suggestion was to reuse the wording form used in [contents] p3 at the end, like the following.
LWG's impression of the intention is that abs, conj, imag, and real are selected via overload resolution on a candidate set that includes:
<cmath>
([cmath.syn]), andI clarified that the abs / conj / imag / real machinery in P1673 exists for the following reasons.
<cmath>
etc. functions (e.g., so that abs of an unsigned integer is the integer, and conj of a real number doesn't have complex type).P2642R2
LWG was concerned that the wording says "apply all wording from P2642R2," but P2642R2 is still in LEWG review. This wording replaced some mdspan layouts that were originally in the proposal. I think P2642 is completely separable from P1673, so we might not even need this.
Fix declaration form of exposition-only concepts
In [linalg.syn], replace patterns like this:
with
Fix [linalg.general]
[linalg.general] (1.2) and (1.3), change
to the following (as "should" sounds like implementations could ignore it):
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: