This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of New status.
Section: 184.108.40.206 [container.node.overview] Status: New Submitter: Richard Smith Opened: 2016-07-08 Last modified: 2016-08-06
View all issues with New status.
The private members of node_handle are missing the usual "exposition only" comment. As a consequence, ptr_ and alloc_ now appear to be names defined by the library (so programs defining these names as macros before including a library header have undefined behavior).Presumably this is unintentional and these members should be considered to be for exposition only. It's also not clear whether the name node_handle is reserved for library usage or not; 220.127.116.11 [container.node.overview]/3 says the implementation need not provide a type with this name, but doesn't seem to rule out the possibility that an implementation will choose to do so regardless.
Daniel:A similar problem seems to exist for the exposition-only type call_wrapper from p0358r1, which exposes a private data member named fd and a typedef FD.
Jonathan says that we need to make clear that the name node_handle is not reserved