Clang support for C++20 P0929 (Checking for abstract class types)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Clang support for C++20 P0929 (Checking for abstract class types)

shirley breuer via cfe-dev

Clang (trunk) does not appear to implement P0929, nor does the C++20 implementation status page acknowledge it.  Known issue?

https://godbolt.org/z/cMcddo

Tom.


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Clang support for C++20 P0929 (Checking for abstract class types)

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 12:46, Tom Honermann via cfe-dev <[hidden email]> wrote:

Clang (trunk) does not appear to implement P0929, nor does the C++20 implementation status page acknowledge it.  Known issue?

Generally we don't track DRs on the cxx_status.html page (they're tracked on cxx_dr_status.html instead). While P0929 doesn't say so (and nor does the motion applying it nor the core issues list), that paper is a resolution to core issue 1640 and 1646, so in principle it would be tracked at cxx_dr_status.html#1646. (But it's not just yet because 1646/1640 haven't been marked as resolved on the core issues list yet.)
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Clang support for C++20 P0929 (Checking for abstract class types)

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
On 12/17/2020 4:11 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 12:46, Tom Honermann via cfe-dev <[hidden email]> wrote:

Clang (trunk) does not appear to implement P0929, nor does the C++20 implementation status page acknowledge it.  Known issue?

Generally we don't track DRs on the cxx_status.html page (they're tracked on cxx_dr_status.html instead). While P0929 doesn't say so (and nor does the motion applying it nor the core issues list), that paper is a resolution to core issue 1640 and 1646, so in principle it would be tracked at cxx_dr_status.html#1646. (But it's not just yet because 1646/1640 haven't been marked as resolved on the core issues list yet.)

Ok, it sounds like the process is, for an adopted paper, check the feature status page first and if it isn't listed there, check to see if the paper claims resolution of any core issues and if it does, then check the DR status page.  Makes sense, thank you!

Tom.

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev