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.
move_iterator::operator*
should have conditional noexcept
specificationSection: 24.5.4.6 [move.iter.elem] Status: New Submitter: Hewill Kang Opened: 2024-07-03 Last modified: 2024-08-02
Priority: 4
View all other issues in [move.iter.elem].
View all issues with New status.
Discussion:
For move_iterator
, dereferencing it is actually equivalent to applying iter_move
to it.
move_iterator
's dereference operator lacks a noexcept
specification, which seems to be an oversight given that the standard goes to such great lengths to
preserve the noexceptness of iter_move
, and the main purpose of move_iterator
is
precisely to apply iter_move
to the underlying iterator via dereferencing.
[2024-08-02; Reflector poll]
Set priority to 4 after reflector poll.
"Do we have evidence conditional noexcept matters here?
Do we have a policy that operator*
should be noexcept whenever possible?
What criteria are we using to decide here?"
Proposed resolution:
This wording is relative to N4981.
Modify 24.5.4.2 [move.iterator] as indicated:
namespace std { template<class Iterator> class move_iterator { public: […] constexpr reference operator*() const noexcept(noexcept(ranges::iter_move(current))); […] }; }
Modify 24.5.4.6 [move.iter.elem] as indicated:
constexpr reference operator*() const noexcept(noexcept(ranges::iter_move(current)));-1- Effects: Equivalent to:
return ranges::iter_move(current);