standard | 🌟 JavaScript Style Guide , with linter & automatic code fixer | Code Analyzer library

After a few days of struggle, I ended up switching to Bundle. It achieves the same purpose for me and it actually works so... That's my solution here.

The boolean conversion operator for std::basic_istream is explicit. This means that instances of the type will not implicitly become a bool but can be converted to one explicitly, for instance by typing bool(infile).

Explicit boolean conversion operators are considered for conditional statements, i.e. the expression parts of if, while etc. More info about contextual conversions here.

However, a return statement will not consider the explicit conversion operators or constructors. So you have to explicitly convert that to a boolean for a return.

You can use the std::nextafter function, which, despite its name, can retrieve the next representable value that is arithmetically before a given starting point, by using an appropriate to argument. (Often -Infinity, 0, or +Infinity).

This works portably by definition of nextafter, regardless of what floating-point format your C++ implementation uses. (Binary vs. decimal, or width of mantissa aka significand, or anything else.)

Example: Retrieving the closest value less than 1 for the double type (on Windows, using the clang-cl compiler in Visual Studio 2019), the answer is different from the result of the 1 - ε calculation (which as discussed in comments, is incorrect for IEEE754 numbers; below any power of 2, representable numbers are twice as close together as above it):

There's a quick-and-dirty approach, which will kinda-hopefully-maybe do what you asked for, and will not even copy the data at all... but the downside is that you can't be certain it will work. It relies on undefined behavior, and can thus not be recommended. I'm describing it because I believe it's what one imagines, intuitively, that we might be able to do.

So, it's about using std::span with re-interpretation of the vector data:

Option 1: Maybe by using UITableViewCellSeparatorStyleNone with the table view and replacing the system background view of the cell with a custom view which only features a bottom line?

Option 2: Using hint from https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/684706

The evaluation order of A = B was not specified before c++17, after c++17 B is guaranteed to be evaluated before A, see https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/eval_order rule 20.

The behaviour of valMap[val] = valMap.size(); is therefore unspecified in c++14, you should use:

It means that particular token is optional. For instance both these declarations work:

Clang is wrong.

[dcl.fct.def.general]

2 The type of a parameter or the return type for a function definition shall not be a (possibly cv-qualified) class type that is incomplete or abstract within the function body unless the function is deleted ([dcl.fct.def.delete]).

That's pretty clear I think. A deleted definition allows for an incomplete class type. It's not like the function can actually be called in a well-formed program, or the body is actually using the incomplete type in some way. The function is a placeholder to signify an invalid result to overload resolution.

Granted, the parameter types are more interesting in the case of actual overload resolution (and the return type can be anything), but there is no reason to restrict the return type into being complete here either.

When exactly does segmentation fault happen (=when is SIGSEGV sent)?

When you attempt to access memory you don’t have access to, such as accessing an array out of bounds or dereferencing an invalid pointer. The signal SIGSEGV is standardized but different OS might implement it differently. "Segmentation fault" is mainly a term used in *nix systems, Windows calls it "access violation".

Why is the process in undefined behavior state after that point?

Because one or several of the variables in the program didn’t behave as expected. Let’s say you have some array that is supposed to store a number of values, but you didn’t allocate enough room for all them. So only those you allocated room for get written correctly, and the rest written out of bounds of the array can hold any values. How exactly is the OS to know how critical those out of bounds values are for your application to function? It knows nothing of their purpose.

Furthermore, writing outside allowed memory can often corrupt other unrelated variables, which is obviously dangerous and can cause any random behavior. Such bugs are often hard to track down. Stack overflows for example are such segmentation faults prone to overwrite adjacent variables, unless the error was caught by protection mechanisms.

If we look at the behavior of "bare metal" microcontroller systems without any OS and no virtual memory features, just raw physical memory - they will just silently do exactly as told - for example, overwriting unrelated variables and keep on going. Which in turn could cause disastrous behavior in case the application is mission-critical.

Why is it not recoverable?

Because the OS doesn’t know what your program is supposed to be doing.

Though in the "bare metal" scenario above, the system might be smart enough to place itself in a safe mode and keep going. Critical applications such as automotive and med-tech aren’t allowed to just stop or reset, as that in itself might be dangerous. They will rather try to "limp home" with limited functionality.

Why does this solution avoid that unrecoverable state? Does it even?

That solution is just ignoring the error and keeps on going. It doesn’t fix the problem that caused it. It’s a very dirty patch and setjmp/longjmp in general are very dangerous functions that should be avoided for any purpose.

We have to realize that a segmentation fault is a symptom of a bug, not the cause.