Skip to content

[vector.modifiers] Old concepts cannot be “modeled” #7836

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 14, 2025

Conversation

xmcgcg
Copy link
Contributor

@xmcgcg xmcgcg commented Apr 14, 2025

[vector.modifiers] p3 says:

For the declarations taking a pair of InputIterator, performs at most one reallocation if InputIterator models Cpp17ForwardIterator.

“Model” should not be used on old Cpp17XXX concepts, “meet the requirements of” should be used instead.

[vector.cons] p10 is also updated for consistency.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer merged commit 5ec6151 into cplusplus:main Apr 14, 2025
0 of 2 checks passed
Comment on lines -10085 to +10086
and no reallocations if iterators \tcode{first} and \tcode{last} are of forward, bidirectional, or random access categories.
and no reallocations if
\tcode{InputIterator} meets the \oldconcept{ForwardIterator} requirements.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure whether the change in these lines is desired or editorial. It seems that the old wording can also be interpreted as "[...] if InputIterator meets the Cpp17ForwardIterator requirements or models forward_iterator".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants