Skip to content

[linalg.conj.conjugatedaccessor] Fix incorrect return type of nested_accessor #8105

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 26, 2025
Merged

[linalg.conj.conjugatedaccessor] Fix incorrect return type of nested_accessor #8105

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 26, 2025

Conversation

Eisenwave
Copy link
Member

@Eisenwave Eisenwave commented Jul 20, 2025 •
edited
Loading

One part of #7214.

As @mhoemmen explains:

Fix return type of nested_accessor member function

The nested_accessor member function of conjugated_accessor (which is defined inline in the class' synopsis) currently returns const Accessor&. This is incorrect, because there is no Accessor type in scope.

The intent is for the function to return const NestedAccessor&. As main author of this proposal, this is the intent. At some point in revisions, the template parameter was renamed from Accessor to NestedAccessor. It's likely that we missed changing the return type of nested_accessor.

@jwakely does this need an LWG issue or can we "just fix this"?

@jensmaurer jensmaurer requested a review from jwakely July 26, 2025 14:24
jwakely
jwakely approved these changes Jul 26, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jwakely jwakely left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems editorial

@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit b74580a into cplusplus:main Jul 26, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jwakely jwakely jwakely approved these changes

@jensmaurer jensmaurer jensmaurer approved these changes

Assignees

@tkoeppe tkoeppe

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@Eisenwave @jwakely @jensmaurer @tkoeppe