Thanks for the quick reply.

On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 at 15:41, Jens Maurer <jens.maurer_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_closed.html#315
> >
> > According to this issue, ptr->h() is OK.
>
> That issue is more than 20 years old.
> Meanwhile, the direction of CWG has changed towards a uniform
> treatment of null pointer values, embodied in the following issue.
> I've amended CWG315 with a cross-reference:
>
> https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/315.html
>
> > https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2823.html
> >
> > According to this issue, ptr->h() is undefined.
>
> That's the result, yes.

So the new resolution overrides the old. OK.

> > Should we mention lvalue-to-rvalue conversion in expr.unary.op/1?
>
> Why?

Only if the old resolution of 315 was right. If we believe ptr->h() is
undefined, of course no changes are needed.

-- 
Yongwei Wu
URL: http://wyw.dcweb.cn/