Understanding C+ + 20 Concepts: GCC vs. Clang Inconsistencies

Explore the differences between `GCC` and `Clang` behavior regarding `C+ + 20 concepts`, and learn which compiler's behavior is correct.
---
This video is based on the question https://stackoverflow.com/q/65439572/ asked by the user 'vigosslive' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/3594565/ ) and on the answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/65440445/ provided by the user 'Barry' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/2069064/ ) at 'Stack Overflow' website. Thanks to these great users and Stackexchange community for their contributions.

Visit these links for original content and any more details, such as alternate solutions, latest updates/developments on topic, comments, revision history etc. For example, the original title of the Question was: Inconsistent behavior between gcc and clang when c+ + 20 concepts are involved

Also, Content (except music) licensed under CC BY-SA https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/licensing
The original Question post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ ) license, and the original Answer post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ ) license.

If anything seems off to you, please feel free to write me at vlogize [AT] gmail [DOT] com.
---
Understanding C+ + 20 Concepts: GCC vs. Clang Inconsistencies

In the world of C+ + , the introduction of C+ + 20 concepts has led to exciting possibilities for enforcing constraints on template types. However, with progress, often comes confusion, as evidenced by the inconsistency observed between the GCC and Clang compilers regarding how they handle these concepts. This guide aims to clarify this inconsistency and provide insight into which compiler is, in fact, behaving correctly.

The Problem: Inconsistent Compiler Behavior

A user recently pointed out an inconsistency between GCC and Clang when evaluating concepts defined in a C+ + program. The issue lies in how each compiler interprets the lookup of custom operators and functions that might be used within these concepts. Here’s a distilled version of the user's issue:

GCC's Behavior: Successfully finds a declared operator== even when defined after the concept.

Clang's Behavior: Fails to find both operator== and compare unless they are declared before the concept.

The central question arises: "Which compiler has the correct behavior?"

Overview of the Code

Before diving into the explanation, let’s summarize the relevant portion of the provided code that demonstrates the issue:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

This code defines two concepts: EqualityComparable and Comparable, each requiring the presence of specific operators or functions.

Outputs from Different Compilers

GCC 10.2 and GCC 11:

EqComparable=1 (true)

Comparable=0 (false)

Clang 11 and Clang 12:

EqComparable=0 (false)

Comparable=0 (false)

The Explanation: What’s Going Wrong?

The crux of the explanation lies in understanding name lookup. In both cases of concepts, the following occurs:

Regular Unqualified Lookup: Attempts to find operator== and compare without considering namespaces.

Argument-Dependent Lookup (ADL): Also known as "Koenig lookup", which does check associated namespaces.

Expected Behavior

Both lookups should find no viable candidates because:

Neither function is declared before the concept it is referenced in.

The only places being considered in the lookups are the std namespace for compare, which does not contain the user-defined function.

Correct Behavior of Clang

According to the C+ + standard, if there are no candidates during name lookup, the concept check should fail. Therefore, in this instance, Clang operates correctly by ensuring that both concepts fail when the prerequisite functions are not declared beforehand.

GCC's Anomaly

Conversely, GCC erroneously finds operator==, even when it should not. This deviation creates confusion and leads to ambiguity in how concepts should be implemented, especially in larger projects where such inconsistencies could create bugs that are hard to trace.

Conclusion: The Verdict

After thorough examination, it becomes clear that Clang is the correct compiler in this scenario. The issue stems from GCC's improper handling of operator lookup, which can lead to false positives in concept evaluations. When using concepts in C+ + , always be mindful of where you declare your functions and operators in relation to your concepts to ensure consistent behavior across all compilers.

By highlighting this issue, we hope to improve awareness and understanding of the intricacies involved in using C+ + 20 concepts, paving the way for better practices and more robust code.

Видео Understanding C+ + 20 Concepts: GCC vs. Clang Inconsistencies канала vlogize