-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.9k
[libc++][pair] P2944R3: Constrain std::pair
's equality operator
#136672
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
Merged
Zingam
merged 8 commits into
llvm:main
from
H-G-Hristov:hgh/libcxx/P2944R3-constrained-equality-std_pair
Apr 29, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
12fc430
[libc++][pair] P2944R3: Constrain `pair` equality operator
H-G-Hristov 6d48213
Updated tests
H-G-Hristov 92544cb
Cleanup test
H-G-Hristov 672c7c3
Fix CI
H-G-Hristov 3079b70
Fix docs gen
H-G-Hristov 40b04ce
Update libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx2cPapers.csv
Zingam 3ff0e71
Update libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx2cPapers.csv
Zingam 292acd3
Merge branch 'main' into hgh/libcxx/P2944R3-constrained-equality-std_…
Zingam File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Don't we have the same situation as in #135759? (that
__boolean_testable
might be too strict)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The standard requirements are inconsistent among these new constraints.
boolean-testable
is used forpair
andtuple
'soperator==
s (perhaps due toboolean-testable
in old Preconditions added by P2167R3), while plain implicit convertibility is used elsewhere.I guess the difference was because of that
&&
(and possibly||
?) is expected to be used inpair
andtuple
'soperator==
s, but not in other mentioned operators.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As @frederick-vs-ja pointed out these are described as
__boolean_testable
in the standard so I prefer to keep them as such for consistency with the Standard but I'll update thereference_wrapper
with the proposed concept in #135759 later.