C++ Logo

std-proposals

Advanced search

Re: [std-proposals] interceptor functions (tested and working on x86_64)

From: Thiago Macieira <thiago_at_[hidden]>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 10:03:42 -0700
On Monday, 27 April 2026 23:35:57 Pacific Daylight Time Jonathan Wakely via
Std-Proposals wrote:
> https://wg21.link/p2826 seems better.

Better, yes. But it has something like;

"One might think that declaring

int g(unsigned x) { return f(x); }

is equivalent; this is far from the case in general, which is exactly why we
need this capability. See the motivation section for the full list of issues
this capability solves."

There is no "motivation" section, which is missing the non-general cases where
it would make a difference. Right now, I can only think of inlined functions
that are *effectively* the same thing, so the value for the proposal is
missing.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
  Principal Engineer - Intel Data Center - Platform & Sys. Eng.

Received on 2026-04-28 17:03:47