--On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 11:34 AM Barry Revzin <barry.revzin@gmail.com> wrote:On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 9:59 AM Arthur O'Dwyer via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 10:13 AM Nikolay Mihaylov via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:Once again, why do we need the size?
Shall we check the size?Via static_assert?During runtime?In the proposed std::get for C arrays, AIUI, the size would be part of the signature. It would look like this:template<size_t X, class T, size_t N> requires (X < N)constexpr T& get(T (&arr)[N]) noexcept {return arr[X];}No, it wouldn't. Paulo's email contained the correct implementation:template <std::size_t Idx, typename T, std::size_t N>
constexpr T& get(T (&arr)[N]) noexcept
{
static_assert(Idx < N, "Index out of bounds");
return arr[Idx];
}This would match what std::get does for std::array, std::pair, and std::tuple.Oh, gross. If it's not going to be SFINAE-friendly, then I don't particularly have an opinion what it does.–Arthur
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals