Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 20:40:58 +0200
On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 20:35, Gašper Ažman <gasper.azman_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> So you're suggesting that
>
> void takes_any_integral_constant(std::integral_constant<auto, auto> c) {} should do the obvious?
Oh, *that* thing. Ha. I don't know yet. All I know is that a syntax
some people think should obviously be
a deduce+constrain syntax seems to be more suitable for being a CTAD
syntax. And there's another
syntax that looks far more like the other deduce+constrain syntaxes.
I'll give more spoilers privately. :P
>
> So you're suggesting that
>
> void takes_any_integral_constant(std::integral_constant<auto, auto> c) {} should do the obvious?
Oh, *that* thing. Ha. I don't know yet. All I know is that a syntax
some people think should obviously be
a deduce+constrain syntax seems to be more suitable for being a CTAD
syntax. And there's another
syntax that looks far more like the other deduce+constrain syntaxes.
I'll give more spoilers privately. :P
Received on 2021-12-08 12:41:10