You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We've accepted static operator() without the suggested fixup to the operator[] for symmetry.
The paper is ready to be accepted and I see no reason to wait 3 years and have a mismatch in the language because the paper could only be submitted after both operator[] has been accepted and operator() was made static.
See P2589R0.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
jensmaurer
changed the title
GB 12.4.5p1 [over.sub] Accept "P2589R0 static operator[]" for consistency with the static operator()
GB-066 12.4.5p1 [over.sub] Accept "P2589R0 static operator[]" for consistency with the static operator()
Nov 3, 2022
We've accepted static operator() without the suggested fixup to the operator[] for symmetry.
The paper is ready to be accepted and I see no reason to wait 3 years and have a mismatch in the language because the paper could only be submitted after both operator[] has been accepted and operator() was made static.
See P2589R0.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: