refactor: CPOs refactored to be more constrained #649
Conversation
|
@JohelEGP, is this what you meant? |
|
Yeah, that looks good. |
|
Do you think that the parameter should be unconstrained? I thought you asked me to contain it. Should those CPOs also work with |
I think it's fine to leave it constrained.
Good question, for LEWG, perhaps. |
| // TODO clang-18 (and possibly other compilers) complain about the duplicated definition if `inline` is not used | ||
| template<> | ||
| inline constexpr bool disable_scalar<bool> = true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe that all variable templates are implicitly inline. It was a recent DR, so maybe it is not implemented in Clang for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's true, but I don't think this is a variable template.
I can't find evidence that an explicit specialization is a template at all.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wait, all global variables are inline: https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2387.html. I believe that is a bug in clang.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Although, I am not sure if I understand a note:
[Note: An instantiated variable template that has const-qualified type can have external linkage, even if not declared extern. —end note]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feel free to leave it explicitly inline.
The only case in the C++ Standard is at the end of https://eel.is/c++draft/fs.filesystem.syn.
No description provided.