[ranges] Reuse `bidirectional-common` concept?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
[range.join.with.view] defines what seems to me to be a fairly general concept:
template<class R>
concept bidirectional-common = bidirectional_range<R> && common_range<R>; // exposition only
However, it is only used in the join_with_view section.
Should we expose it to [ranges] to simplify spellings used elsewhere like bidirectional_range<R> && common_range<R>?
Perhaps we can also create another one such as random-access-sized to simplify constraints.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Review the [ranges] wording linked in the issue, especially the join_with_view section and its bidirectional-common exposition-only concept. Determine whether the concept should be exposed more broadly and whether a random-access-sized concept is warranted. Done means reaching and documenting a settled standards decision; the payload names no files or tests.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100