On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 11:38 PM Hubert Tong <hubert.reinterpretcast@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 2:16 PM Corentin via SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Early draft, feedback welcome.

Thanks, 
Corentin 

https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D2626R0.pdf 

The pointer+size overloads will end the lifetime of class objects if they end the lifetime of class members.

As promised from Wednesday: The wording that ends the lifetime of the containing object (in the case where the replacing "string" is not "nested within" the containing object) is 6.7.3 [basic.life]/1. Placing the string inside an appropriate union will avoid the issue.
 
The constexpr-ness requires input from EDG, MSVC, and GCC implementers.
 
--
SG16 mailing list
SG16@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16