Skip to content

Conversation

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Fixes NB FI-392, CA-393 (C++26 CD).

Fixes #8475
Fixes cplusplus/papers#2426

Fixes cplusplus/nbballot#967
Fixes cplusplus/nbballot#968

Fixes NB FI-392, CA-393 (C++26 CD).
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to the post-2025-11 milestone Nov 15, 2025
Comment on lines +5066 to +5067
using assoc_t = associate_data_t::assoc-t;
using sender_ref_t = associate_data_t::sender-ref;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
using assoc_t = associate_data_t::assoc-t;
using sender_ref_t = associate_data_t::sender-ref;
using assoc_t = associate_data_t::@\exposid{assoc-t}@;
using sender_ref_t = associate_data_t::@\exposid{sender-ref}@;

explicit op_state(pair<assoc_t, sender_ref_t> parts, Rcvr& r)
: assoc(std::move(parts.first)) {
if (assoc)
::new (voidify(op)) op_t(connect(std::move(*parts.second), std::move(r)));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
::new (voidify(op)) op_t(connect(std::move(*parts.second), std::move(r)));
::new (@\exposid{voidify}@(op)) op_t(connect(std::move(*parts.second), std::move(r)));

\begin{codeblock}
is_nothrow_constructible_v<remove_cvref_t<Sndr>, Sndr> &&
is_nothrow_move_constructible_v<@\exposid{wrap-sender}@> &&
(is_same_v<Sndr, remove_cvref_t> ||
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is_same_v<Sndr, remove_cvref_t> ?! ?!

\indexlibrarymember{\exposid{run}}{execution::\exposid{spawn-state}}%
\begin{itemdecl}
void @\exposid{run}@();
void @\exposid{run}@() noexcept;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Forgot to make it noexcept in synopsis.

source/exec.tex Outdated
movable<Assoc> &&
is_nothrow_move_constructible_v<Assoc> &&
is_nothrow_move_assignable_v<Assoc> &&
default_initializable<Assoc> &&
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
default_initializable<Assoc> &&
@\libconcept{default_initializable}@<Assoc> &&

requires(const Token token) {
{ token.try_associate() } -> @\libconcept{same_as}@<bool>;
{ token.disassociate() } noexcept -> @\libconcept{same_as}@<void>;
{ token.try_associate() } -> @\libconcept{scope_association}@<bool>;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe this fix would be worth a separate fixup commit; it's not in the paper at least.

};

template<class Scope>
@\exposid{struct association-t}@; // \expos
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
@\exposid{struct association-t}@; // \expos
struct @\exposid{association-t}@; // \expos

\item
if \tcode{assoc} is engaged,
then \tcode{assoc.try_associate()} is equivalent to
\tcode{assoc.scope->try-associate()}, and
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
\tcode{assoc.scope->try-associate()}, and
\tcode{assoc.scope->\exposid{try-associate}()}, and

\tcode{assoc.scope->try-associate()}, and
\item
the association owned by \tcode{assoc}
is released by invoking \tcode{assoc.scope->disassociate()}.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
is released by invoking \tcode{assoc.scope->disassociate()}.
is released by invoking \tcode{assoc.scope->\exposid{disassociate}()}.

\pnum
\effects
If \exposid{count} is equal to \tcode{max_associations},
then no effects. Otherwise, if \exposid{state} is
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
then no effects. Otherwise, if \exposid{state} is
then no effects.
Otherwise, if \exposid{state} is

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.

[2025-11 LWG Motion 16] P3815R1 Add scope_association concept to P3149 P3815 R0 Add scope_association concept to P3149

3 participants