You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The specification of optional uses various forms of "direct-non-list-initialization", which is defined in [general.defns.direct-non-list-init] in the Fundamentals TS, but that definition wasn't added to the IS working paper for the merge.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Looks like we could instead just remove the (unnecessary) new term. Example:
If rhs contains a value, initializes the contained value as if direct-non-list-initializing an object
of type T with the expression *rhs.
could be rewritten as
If rhs contains a value, initializes the contained value with the initializer (*rhs).
This is shorter, simpler, and doesn't require inventing a new term for something that the core language can already express. We should first run this past LWG to make sure (a) they're OK with this, and (b) they change their habits (and the fundamentals TS) to apply the same pattern going forward.
The specification of
optional
uses various forms of "direct-non-list-initialization", which is defined in [general.defns.direct-non-list-init] in the Fundamentals TS, but that definition wasn't added to the IS working paper for the merge.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: