bool comparison to pointers or any integer types will never be removed from
language, as it would break a lot of perfectly good code (e.g. if (ptr)...
instead if (ptr != nullptr)... ).
For default parameters, avoid use of bool - use strong type (e.g. class
enum type with two adequately named constants, see for instance
https://www.sandordargo.com/blog/2022/04/06/use-strong-types-instead-booleans
for example).

On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 5:26 PM Alejandro Colomar via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2026-04-20T20:00:44+0500, Muneem via Std-Proposals wrote:
> > Relying on external tools for reporting errors is always unreliable.
>
> Why would clang-tidy(1) be unrealiable??
>
> > What
> > one would need is standard adapter. Using macros or external tools for
> > something as simple as an adaptor should be avoided. Until c++ provides
> > adaptors, I would say make it yourself. It's simple:
> > 1.that is to make an adaptor where you make all default copy constructors
> > and copy assignment operators explicit.
> > 2.provide a conversion operators to bool that returns the underlying bool
> > 3. constructor that takes a bool argument and constructs the underlying
> > bool.
> > Problem fixed, right?
> > No need for macros.
>
> No, thanks. Overloading operators is something you will never see me
> doing.
>
> As Ville said, there's std::same_as<>.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Alex
>
> --
> <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>