C++ Logo

std-proposals

Advanced search

Re: [std-proposals] Replace an object -- but retain old object if new object fails to construct

From: Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dangelo_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 12:01:12 +0100
Il 29/10/25 11:07, Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Std-Proposals ha scritto:
>
>
> On Tuesday, October 28, 2025, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
>
> The current specification allows for trivial relocation of
> polymorphic types, on *any* platform. Polymorphism simply isn't
> taken into account when deciding whether a class is trivially
> relocatable or not:
>
>
> struct PolyTR {
> virtual void f();
> };
>
> static_assert( std::is_polymorphic_v<PolyTR> );
> static_assert( std::is_trivially_relocatable_v<PolyTR> ); // OK,
> everywhere
>
>
>
>
> We need an arm64e compiler-and-executor up on GodBolt. We need to be
> able to test all this stuff out.
>
> Can someone please talk to Matthew Godbolt and ask if this can be made
> available? Arthur I think you've had compilers added? We really need
> this . . . before the talk on November 5th about trivial relocation.

Test what? What is there to prove or disprove?

--
Giuseppe D'Angelo

Received on 2025-10-29 11:01:18