Would it? The sub-types would be different types in the type system, and so would be the templated container classes, wouldn't they?   Or would the proposal <Scalar Inheritance> use the scalar type for templates?   -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von:Karafiát, László <laszlo_at_[hidden]> Gesendet:Mo 02.09.2024 18:43 Betreff:Re: [std-proposals] Fwd: Standardised Type Punning API for Wrapper Types An:std-proposals_at_[hidden]; CC:Sebastian Wittmeier <wittmeier_at_[hidden]>; Hi, my proposal <Scalar Inheritance> would allow sub-typing (instead of wrapping) scalar types. Would that be not a clearer and better solution? László On 2024-09-02 17:07, Sebastian Wittmeier via Std-Proposals wrote: > How would you know that the container specialization is different? > > Or in other words they are always different as it is a template. > > At least each container would have to support such a facility to remove > the type by itself. Otherwise the implementation details could hide > incompatibilities. > > std::vector could support a move_to member function: > > std::vector<my_distance_type> d1; > > // creates a new d2 with new metadata, but keeps the convertible actual > data without copying > > // d1 is empty afterwards > > std::vector<double> d2 = d1.move_to<double>(); > >