Section: 21.3.4 [numeric.limits] Status: NAD Concepts Submitter: Alisdair Meredith Opened: 2009-03-11 Last modified: 2016-02-10
Priority: Not Prioritized
View other active issues in [numeric.limits].
View all other issues in [numeric.limits].
View all issues with NAD Concepts status.
Addresses JP 26
numeric_limits [partial specializations] does not use concept.
[ Summit: ]
Alisdair will provide a solution as part of treatment of axioms and LWG 902.
[ Post Summit: ]
Alisdair recommends NAD as the partial specializations are already constrained by requirements on the primary template.
[ Batavia (2009-05): ]
The Working Draft does not in general repeat a primary template's constraints in any specializations. Move to NAD.
[ 2009-05-25 Howard adds: ]
A c++std-lib thread starting at c++std-lib-23880 has cast doubt that NAD is the correct resolution of this issue. Indeed the discussion also casts doubt that the current proposed wording is the correct resolution as well. Personally I'm inclined to reset the status to Open. However I'm reverting the status to that which it had prior to the Batavia recommendation. I'm setting back to Review.
Change 21.3.4 [numeric.limits]:
classT> class numeric_limits<const T>; template< classT> class numeric_limits<volatile T>; template< classT> class numeric_limits<const volatile T>;