erichkeane
commented
1 year ago Make the staticness of a capture-less lambda operator() implementation defined for C++23, as proposed in the NB comment.
| SF | F | N | A | SA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 3 | 15 | 6 |
Result: No Consensus for change: Recommend to Reject.
With the adoption of P1169 (static operator()), lambdas with no capture can have a static call operator. But only if someone explicitly writes that in code. That seems hostile to new code, which now has to write more annotation just in case it might matter for performance.
Proposed change:
Consider making the static-ness of the call operator implementation-defined, so that compilers can make this a switch.