jfb added a comment.

In D62825#1542377 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825#1542377>, @rsmith wrote:

> (You might argue that it's ridiculous to require that `nullptr_t` have the 
> same size and alignment as `void*` but not have the same storage 
> representation as a null `void*`. I'd agree, and I've raised this in 
> committee before, but without success)


We could open a DR for `bit_cast<void*>(nullptr_t{})`, with proposed resolution 
that the `void*` returned is a null `void*`. Approaching the same problem from 
a different angle to confuse the prey.


Repository:
  rC Clang

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D62825



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to