Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

GB-080 17.4.1 [cstdint.syn] Sync intmax_t and uintmax_t with C2x #447

Closed
wg21bot opened this issue Oct 24, 2022 · 8 comments · Fixed by cplusplus/draft#6116
Closed

GB-080 17.4.1 [cstdint.syn] Sync intmax_t and uintmax_t with C2x #447

wg21bot opened this issue Oct 24, 2022 · 8 comments · Fixed by cplusplus/draft#6116

Comments

@wg21bot
Copy link
Collaborator

wg21bot commented Oct 24, 2022

With the approval of https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/WG14/www/docs/n2888.htm the next C standard will resolve the long-standing issue that implementations cannot support 128-bit integer types properly without ABI breaks. C++ should adopt the same fix now, rather than waiting until a future C++ standard is rebased on C2x.

[cinttypes.syn] also mentions those types, but doesn't need a change. The proposed change allows intmax_t to be an extended integer type of the same width as long long, in which case we'd still want those abs overloads.

Add to [cstdint.syn] p2 "except that intmax_t is not required to be able to represent all values of extended integer types wider than long long, and uintmax_t is not required to be able to represent all values of extended integer types wider than unsigned long long."

@wg21bot wg21bot added the LEWG Library Evolution label Oct 24, 2022
@wg21bot wg21bot added this to the CD C++23 milestone Oct 24, 2022
@jensmaurer jensmaurer changed the title GB 17.4.1 [cstdint.syn] Sync intmax_t and uintmax_t with C2x GB-080 17.4.1 [cstdint.syn] Sync intmax_t and uintmax_t with C2x Nov 3, 2022
@FabioFracassi
Copy link
Collaborator

FabioFracassi commented Nov 10, 2022

GB-080: Sync intmax_t and uintmax_t with C2x

2022-11-08 10:00 to 11:30 UTC-10 Kona Library Evolution Minutes

POLL: Apply the resolution suggested in GB-080, relax the requirements on intmax_t/uintmax_t for C++23

Strongly Favor Weakly Favor Neutral Weakly Against Strongly Against
13 4 0 0 0

Attendance: 13 + 6

# of Authors: 1

Author Position: SF

Outcome: Unanimous consensus in favor.

@JohelEGP

This comment was marked as resolved.

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Nov 11, 2022

That's another comment.

Fixed

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Nov 11, 2022

This will be addressed by LWG 3828

@brycelelbach
Copy link

2022-11 Library Evolution Electronic Poll Outcomes

Poll 1.16: Send the proposed resolution to C++23 National Body comment GB-080 Sync intmax_t And uintmax_t With C2x to Library Working Group for C++23, classified as an improvement of an existing feature ([P0592R4] bucket 2 item).

Strongly Favor Weakly Favor Neutral Weakly Against Strongly Against
12 8 0 0 0

Outcome: Unanimous consensus in favor.

@brycelelbach
Copy link

@JeffGarland heads up.

@JeffGarland
Copy link
Member

https://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21issaquah2023/LWG3828-20230206

poll: accept the proposed resolution for C++23 and make it immediate?

F A N
13 0 0

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Mar 23, 2023

Accepted with modification.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Ready
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants