From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 20ACA3858C20; Fri,  4 Feb 2022 00:55:03 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 20ACA3858C20
From: "rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/102994] std::atomic<ptr>::wait is not marked const
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 00:55:03 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: SUSPENDED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-102994-4-InVdkYCH7P@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102994-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102994-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 00:55:04 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102994

Thomas Rodgers <rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |SUSPENDED

--- Comment #11 from Thomas Rodgers <rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10)
> N.B. [member.functions] in the standard says=20
>=20
> "For a non-virtual member function described in the C++ standard library,=
 an
> implementation may declare a different set of member function signatures,
> provided that any call to the member function that would select an overlo=
ad
> from the set of declarations described in this document behaves as if that
> overload were selected."
>=20
> In general, being declared with a different signature is permitted.
>=20
> Do you have an example where a call to std::atomic<T>::notify_one() that
> should be valid according to the standard either fails to compile or
> misbehaves, as a result of being const qualified?

Pending the outcome of whether there is an LWG issue with the wording, and
given this, I am going to mark this issue SUSPENDED.=