[2025-02 CWG Motion 5] P2900R14 - Contracts for C++ #7695
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
MikailBag
reviewed
Feb 19, 2025
xmcgcg
reviewed
Feb 22, 2025
tkoeppe
force-pushed
the
motions-2025-02-cwg-5
branch
from
10cb85c to
a470da8
Compare
cmeerw
reviewed
Feb 24, 2025
jensmaurer
reviewed
Feb 24, 2025
notadragon
force-pushed
the
motions-2025-02-cwg-5
branch
from
37d5acb to
f9fac8b
Compare
xmcgcg
reviewed
Feb 27, 2025
xmcgcg
reviewed
Feb 28, 2025
…e because that seems to be the consistent style in the standard, removed informational-only JMB comments
jensmaurer
reviewed
Mar 5, 2025
jensmaurer
reviewed
Mar 5, 2025
xmcgcg
reviewed
Mar 6, 2025
xmcgcg
reviewed
Mar 7, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes: #7655
Also Fixes: cplusplus/papers#1648
I have put comments in starting with JMB (my initials) where an editorial change was made due to minor mistakes in P2900 (missing comma, rebasing, etc.) as well as some places where I think we should have additional xrefs.
This is also based on the changes for P1494 (#7681) as we modify a paragraph added there. That should certainly merge first, and I will keep this PR rebased on it.