Closed jensmaurer closed 3 months ago
This paper includes the following under the wording for [containers.sequences.inplace.vector.overview]:
LWG Review TODO: We need to review this last clause about constexpr. [...]
Has that happened?
Yes, LWG reviewed all the wording
The operator<=>
seems to suffer from the same problem as that in LWG4071. Is this already discussed or fixed?
No, I don't think that was discussed.
The reference implementation was incomplete :angry:
constexpr friend int /*synth-three-way-result<T>*/
operator<=>(const inplace_vector& __x, const inplace_vector& __y)
https://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21stlouis2024/StrawPolls/P0843%20inplace_vector.html