[vector.bool.fmt][container.adaptors.format] Add missing constexpr#8768
Conversation
This PR completes the previously missing `constexpr` addition from P3391R2 and consistently adds `constexpr` to function descriptions.
eisenwave
added
the
P1-Important
jensmaurer
added
the
changes requested
| \tcode{priority_queue}, and | ||
| \tcode{stack}, | ||
| the library provides the following formatter specialization | ||
| the library provides the following constexpr-enabled formatter specialization |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"constexpr-enabled" does not imply "enabled" according to [format.formatter.spec], so this is a normative change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's just a missing edit from the application of P3391, and similarly for the next change below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So yes, it is a normative change, but one that was approved at plenary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So, you're saying this is a missed edit from the application of P3391R2, beyond a few sprinkled "constexpr" annotations ? That would be good to say in the commit comment.
But that causes an LWG issue, because "constexpr-enabled" doesn't imply "enabled", I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have:
If the library provides an explicit or partial specialization of
formatter<T, charT>, that specialization is enabled and meets the Formatter requirements except as noted otherwise.
So I think these specializations are enabled just by virtue of being present in the library spec. We don't also need to say they're enabled
4 participants
This PR completes the previously missing
constexpraddition from P3391R2 and consistently addsconstexprto function descriptions.