This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of Resolved status.

3575. <=> for integer-class types isn't consistently specified

Section: 23.3.4.4 [iterator.concept.winc] Status: Resolved Submitter: Jiang An Opened: 2021-07-25 Last modified: 2021-10-23

Priority: 3

View all other issues in [iterator.concept.winc].

View all issues with Resolved status.

Discussion:

It seems that the return type of <=> for integer-class types is not specified consistently with other comparison operators. Even P2393R0 has ignored it.

IMO strong_ordering should be added to 23.3.4.4 [iterator.concept.winc]/(5.3), and three_way_comparable<strong_ordering> should be added to 23.3.4.4 [iterator.concept.winc]/8.

[2021-07-31, Daniel comments]

The upcoming revision P2393R1 will provide additional wording to solve this issue.

[2021-08-20; Reflector poll]

Set priority to 3 after reflector poll. Tentatively Resolved by P2393R1 which has been approved by LWG.

[2021-10-23 Resolved by the adoption of P2393R1 at the October 2021 plenary. Status changed: Tentatively Resolved → Resolved.]

Proposed resolution: