What happened to std::atomic<X>::value_type?

  • A+
Category:Languages

According to this reference manual

For every std::atomic (whether or not specialized), std::atomic::value_type is X.

But if I try using such type I get a compilation error.

I've tried it with g++ 8.2.1:

$ g++ -std=c++11 test.cc  test.cc: In function ‘int main()’: test.cc:6:23: error: ‘value_type’ is not a member of ‘std::atomic<int>’      std::atomic<int>::value_type x = 0; 

And with clang 6.0.1

$ clang -std=c++11 test.cc  test.cc:6:23: error: no type named 'value_type' in 'std::atomic<int>'     std::atomic<int>::value_type x = 0; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^ 

The afore mentioned reference manual specifies also says that...

specification was substantially rewritten to resolve numerous issues in particular, member typedefs value_type and difference_type are added

The P0558R1 specification however seems not to forbid the existence of value_type.

Any idea what's going on?

Edit

A colleague of mine made me realize that P0558R1 is just a proposal.

 


You are explicitly using C++11. If we look at page 1119 of the last draft of the C++11 standard, there is no mention of value_type for std::atomic:

template <class T> struct atomic {     bool is_lock_free() const volatile;     bool is_lock_free() const;     void store(T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;     void store(T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst);     T load(memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) const volatile;     T load(memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) const;     operator T() const volatile;     operator T() const;     T exchange(T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;     T exchange(T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst);     bool compare_exchange_weak(T&, T, memory_order, memory_order) volatile;     bool compare_exchange_weak(T&, T, memory_order, memory_order);     bool compare_exchange_strong(T&, T, memory_order, memory_order) volatile;     bool compare_exchange_strong(T&, T, memory_order, memory_order);     bool compare_exchange_weak(T&, T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;     bool compare_exchange_weak(T&, T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst);     bool compare_exchange_strong(T&, T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst) volatile;     bool compare_exchange_strong(T&, T, memory_order = memory_order_seq_cst);      atomic() = default;     constexpr atomic(T);     atomic(const atomic&) = delete;     atomic& operator=(const atomic&) = delete;     atomic& operator=(const atomic&) volatile = delete;     T operator=(T) volatile;     T operator=(T); }; 

It is similarly absent in the C++14 draft.

cppreference just fails to mention "since C++17" for value_type.

Edit: It has been pointed out that the addition of value_type was in the form of a defect report and should be applied retroactively to implementations of C++11. As such, cppreference is not actually wrong, the DR just has not been implemented in the given compiler versions.

Comment

:?: :razz: :sad: :evil: :!: :smile: :oops: :grin: :eek: :shock: :???: :cool: :lol: :mad: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :cry: :mrgreen: