<=>
for integer-class types isn't consistently specifiedSection: 24.3.4.4 [iterator.concept.winc] Status: Resolved Submitter: Jiang An Opened: 2021-07-25 Last modified: 2021-10-23
Priority: 3
View all other issues in [iterator.concept.winc].
View all issues with Resolved status.
Discussion:
It seems that the return type of <=>
for integer-class types is not specified consistently with
other comparison operators. Even P2393R0 has ignored it.
strong_ordering
should be added to 24.3.4.4 [iterator.concept.winc]/(5.3), and
three_way_comparable<strong_ordering>
should be added to 24.3.4.4 [iterator.concept.winc]/8.
[2021-07-31, Daniel comments]
The upcoming revision P2393R1 will provide additional wording to solve this issue.
[2021-08-20; Reflector poll]
Set priority to 3 after reflector poll. Tentatively Resolved by P2393R1 which has been approved by LWG.
[2021-10-23 Resolved by the adoption of P2393R1 at the October 2021 plenary. Status changed: Tentatively Resolved → Resolved.]
Proposed resolution: