[2025-02 CWG Motion 4] P1494R5 Partial program correctness #7681
Conversation
| @@ -670,7 +671,7 @@ | |||
| \tcode{static_cast<underlying_type_t<T>>(value)}. | |||
| \end{itemdescr} | |||
|
|
|||
| \rSec2[utility.unreachable]{Function \tcode{unreachable}} | |||
| \rSec2[utility.undefined]{Undefined behavior} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This needs a \movedxref entry in xrefdelta.tex
There was a problem hiding this comment.
xrefprev seems to be missing utility.unreachable. I'll add it, but it also seems to be missing about 500 other stable names from N4950 that are not in xrefprev. would you like me to add those? (It's unclear to me what the intent of the contents of xrefprev is --- whether it should be removed names, or just all names that were previously in use -- either way that is not what it is).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
xrefprev is supposed to be the list of xrefs in C++17, so that we get warnings from our tooling when a label vanishes without mention in xrefdelta.tex. Maybe that went wrong when I added that; Alisdair has a patch in a nearby pull request, too.
So, until we fix xrefprev for real, we need to manually add the old label.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok. shouldn't it be the list of stable names from any previously published standard? Or from C++17 to C++23 inclusive? I could grab that pretty easily if it helps (I already extracted it from C++23), but for this PR I have added utility.uncreachable manually to xrefprev.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The problem is we've added the label since C++17, and now we're renaming it. So, it's technically not correct that it was a label in C++17, which xrefprev attempts to represent.
The once-off fix feels reasonable for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I merged Alisdair's changes, but I don't think it touches on this. But we can follow this up later I suppose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding of @StephanTLavavej's request is that we don't just want the diff of the stable labels relative to one arbitrary point in the past, but rather, we want a full history of things that have happened, so that if you've been working with any one version of the document and are switching to a newer one, you can look up what happened to the label you had been working with.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I definitely think that'd be way more useful than just "here's things that were in C++17 that might have moved". It might be even more useful to have the index list when the name was moved (i.e, "utility.unreachable (moved in C++26, see utility.undefined)"
notadragon
changed the title
notadragon
changed the title
notadragon
force-pushed
the
motions-2025-02-cwg-4
branch
from
60ccef5 to
8196161
Compare
tkoeppe
force-pushed
the
motions-2025-02-cwg-4
branch
from
8196161 to
9d85c93
Compare
tkoeppe
force-pushed
the
motions-2025-02-cwg-4
branch
from
9d85c93 to
debf098
Compare
Fixes: #7654
Also fixes: cplusplus/papers#376
It's my first paper PR, so please be gentle :)