This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of Resolved status.

### 2999. §[thread.decaycopy] issue

Section: 16.3.3.2 [expos.only.func] Status: Resolved Submitter: Marshall Clow Opened: 2017-07-11 Last modified: 2020-05-03

Priority: 3

View all issues with Resolved status.

Discussion:

[thread.decaycopy] says:

> In several places in this Clause the operation `DECAY_COPY(x)` is used. All such uses mean call the function `decay_copy(x)` and use the result, where `decay_copy` is defined as follows:

but `decay_copy` is not defined in any synopsis.

The Ranges TS has a similar use of `DECAY_COPY`, except that theirs is also `constexpr` and `noexcept`.

We should mark the function `decay_copy` as "exposition only" and `constexpr` and `noexcept`.

[2017-07-16, Daniel comments]

Currently there exists no proper way to mark `decay_copy` as conditionally `noexcept` as explained in N3255 section "Adding to the Standard". This is also slighly related to the request to add an `is_nothrow_convertible` trait, as requested by LWG 2040.

[ 2017-11-01 P3 as result of c++std-lib online vote. ]

[2019-03-22; Daniel comments]

Starting with N4800 have now a `constexpr` and conditionally `noexcept` `decay-copy` in the working draft (16.3.3.2 [expos.only.func]). The pre-condition for that specification helper became possible by adoption of P0758R1, which introduced the missing `is_nothrow_convertible` trait.

[2020-05-03; Reflector discussions]

Resolved by editorial action starting with N4800.

Rationale:

Resolved by editorial creation of `decay-copy` after acceptance of P0758R1.

Proposed resolution: