Andrew Schepler
- Re: A contradiction between [class.base.init#9] and [class.copy.ctor#14]
- Re: The issue about the wording "member of a class"
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: new token "not equal" "= / ="
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: commutative functions
Christopher Head
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
Farid Mehrabi
Jason McKesson
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: what is the "glvalue result" in [stmt.return] section
- Re: add version of std::stoi, std::stol etc that receive std::string_view
Jean Guegant
jim x
- Re: An confusion about the paragraph [temp.expl.spec#18]
- An confusion about the paragraph [temp.expl.spec#18]
- Re: A contradiction between [class.base.init#9] and [class.copy.ctor#14]
- A contradiction between [class.base.init#9] and [class.copy.ctor#14]
- Maybe a wording defect for virtual function in the standard
- Some confusion about the transformed function type during partial ordering
- Re: The issue about the wording "member of a class"
- The issue about the wording "member of a class"
- Re: [basic.life]/8.5 interpretation
- Re: [basic.life]/8.5 interpretation
- Re: [basic.life]/8.5 interpretation
- Re: [basic.life]/8.5 interpretation
- Re: [basic.life]/8.5 interpretation
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- The issue about reference collapsing for function parameter pack
- Re: what is the "glvalue result" in [stmt.return] section
- what is the "glvalue result" in [stmt.return] section
- Re: Does the wording about the rule of deduction for type placeholder for a variable declaration exist a defect
- Does the wording about the rule of deduction for type placeholder for a variable declaration exist a defect
Johannes Schaub
- Re: An confusion about the paragraph [temp.expl.spec#18]
- Re: An confusion about the paragraph [temp.expl.spec#18]
John Mousseau
language.lawyer_at
- Re: [basic.life]/8.5 interpretation
- Re: Does the wording about the rule of deduction for type placeholder for a variable declaration exist a defect
Matthew Woehlke
Nevin Liber
Richard Hodges
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
Robert Behar
- why does std::basic_string comparison operator expect a string with the same allocator class
- add version of std::stoi, std::stol etc that receive std::string_view
Roger Orr
Thiago Macieira
- Re: An confusion about the paragraph [temp.expl.spec#18]
- Re: add version of std::stoi, std::stol etc that receive std::string_view
Tobias W.
Ville Voutilainen
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: Making the new expression smart
- Re: No attributes for concepts in C++20