This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of C++17 status.
Section: 22.214.171.124 [refwrap.invoke] Status: C++17 Submitter: Stephan T. Lavavej Opened: 2014-10-01 Last modified: 2017-07-30
View all other issues in [refwrap.invoke].
View all issues with C++17 status.
126.96.36.199 [refwrap.invoke]/2 is no longer useful. (It was originally TR1 188.8.131.52 [tr.util.refwrp.invoke]/2.) First, we already have the As If Rule (6.9.1 [intro.execution]/1) and the STL Implementers Can Be Sneaky Rule (184.108.40.206 [member.functions]). Second, with variadic templates and other C++11/14 tech, this can be implemented exactly as depicted.
DK: I don't see a defect here
STL: the issue is that the standard is overly verbose, we don't need this sentence. It's redundant.
MC: does anyone think this paragraph has value?
JW: it has negative value. reading it makes me wonder if there's some reason I would want to provide a set of overloaded functions, maybe there's some problem with doing it the obvious way that I'm not clever enough to see.
Move to Ready status: 8 in favor, none against.
This wording is relative to N3936.
Change 220.127.116.11 [refwrap.invoke] p2 as depicted:
template <class... ArgTypes> result_of_t<T&(ArgTypes&&...)> operator()(ArgTypes&&... args) const;
-1- Returns: INVOKE(get(), std::forward<ArgTypes>(args)...). (20.9.2)
-2- Remark: operator() is described for exposition only. Implementations are not required to provide an actual reference_wrapper::operator(). Implementations are permitted to support reference_wrapper function invocation through multiple overloaded operators or through other means.