Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 09:34:41 +0100
On 14/11/2019 01.49, Richard Smith via Core wrote:
> That said... I'm actually more inclined to say we should remove __cpp_nontype_template_parameter_class entirely and just bump __cpp_nontype_template_args. No-one ever fully implemented __cpp_nontype_template_parameter_class as far as I'm aware, and the feature we ended up with isn't class-type-specific (what we have now is "anything fully constant other than non-public subobjects or rvalue references").
Agreed.
Jens
> That said... I'm actually more inclined to say we should remove __cpp_nontype_template_parameter_class entirely and just bump __cpp_nontype_template_args. No-one ever fully implemented __cpp_nontype_template_parameter_class as far as I'm aware, and the feature we ended up with isn't class-type-specific (what we have now is "anything fully constant other than non-public subobjects or rvalue references").
Agreed.
Jens
Received on 2019-11-14 09:39:51