This is an unofficial snapshot of the ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21 Core Issues List revision 119a. See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/ for the official list.
2025-12-20
[Accepted as a DR at the November, 2022 meeting.]
Consider:
// translation unit 1export module A;export class X {};// translation unit 2import A;X x; // isX complete at this point?
Subclause 11.4.1 [class.mem.general] paragraph 8 specifies:
A class is considered a completely-defined object type(6.9.1 [basic.types.general]) (or complete type) at theclosing} of theclass-specifier. ...
The syntactic (even lexical) reference to the closing}does not address the question when a different translation unitregards a class as complete. However, it seems this provision isentirely redundant given 6.3 [basic.def.odr] paragraph 13:
A definition of a class shall be reachable in every context in whichthe class is used in a way that requires the class type to becomplete.
The standard never asks the question: "Is class X complete?"; italways specifies "X shall be complete" (otherwise the program isill-formed).
Possible resolution [SUPERSEDED]:
Change in 11.4.1 [class.mem.general] paragraph 8 as follows:
A class is considered a completely-defined object type(6.9.1 [basic.types.general]) (or complete type) at theclosing} of theclass-specifier.TheA class is regarded as complete within itscomplete-class contexts; otherwise it is regarded as incomplete withinits own classmember-specification.
CWG telecon 2022-10-21:
Explicitly refer to reachable definitions.
Proposed resolution (approved by CWG 2022-11-09):
Change in 11.4.1 [class.mem.general] paragraph 8 as follows:
A class is considered a completely-defined object type(6.9.1 [basic.types.general]) (or complete type) at theclosing} of theclass-specifier.TheA class is regarded as completewhere itsdefinition is reachable and within its complete-class contexts;otherwise it is regarded as incomplete within its ownclassmember-specification.