P0009 LWG Review 03/04/2022

~extents::rank_dynamic call dynamic-index instead of fold~ c12ff4a4f
~change comment: Constructors and assignment to Constructors, label change to mdspan.extents.ctors~ c0745758
~mdspan.extents.compare -> mdspan.extents.cmp~ e5e8eb905
~paragraph 3-5 being one, leave 6~ c0745758
~rev-prod-of-extents misses argument name e and i in synopsis and definition~ c0745758
~Preconditions missing dot: 7 9 11 13~ 94fe9afc0b1
~par: 12 and 14 comma after condition, and "the product"~ 94fe9afc0b1
~Separate heading for exposition only members where the line is~ c0745758
~make fwd/rev-prod-of-extents public member functions~ c0745758ad3
- ~accept rank-type~ c0745758ad3
- add note: these functions are only invoked in situations where this can't overflow

converting constructor:
- ~put the explicit condition into the see below (but not in the synopsis)~ 737dae6357
- ~For each E_r that is not dynamic index, E_r is equal to other.extent(r).~ c0745758
~par 5.3: dynamic extents should not be in italics~ 94fe9afc0b1

Thought experiment but don't do this:

template<class...SizeTypes
explicit constexpr extents(SizeTypes... exts)

- change to have two constructors with dynamic and rank size_types
- try this in implementation
~qualify move/forward with std:: everywhere~ 4e4df5e004a
~par 7: remove italics from static extent~ 94fe9afc0b1
~par 9.1 "is" true instead of "equals" true~c0745758
~par 9.3 (N=rank_dynamic || N==rank()) is true~ c0745758
~par 11.1 element wise wording like 11.2~ 2361c570ad
- ~also check that in layout_stride~ 2361c570ad
~just do explicit extents(Integrals...) -> see below~ 737dae6357

~Fix numbering~ ec5e87461481
~par 1.6: the integer packs i and j are ...~ c12ff4a4
~par 1.8: dr is a pack of (possibly const) pack of integers~ c12ff4a4
- ~make dr a d_r like E_r~ 1b571ebcb430

ORNL / cpp-proposals-pub