Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[char.traits.specializations] Inconsistent punctuation in stable names of subsections #1293

Closed
Eelis opened this issue Dec 28, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@Eelis
Copy link
Contributor

Eelis commented Dec 28, 2016

This section has 4 subsections:

  • [char.traits.specializations.char]
  • [char.traits.specializations.char16_t]
  • [char.traits.specializations.char32_t] ← note the underscore
  • [char.traits.specializations.wchar.t] ← note the period
@Eelis Eelis changed the title [char.traits.specializations] Inconsistent punctuation in subsection abbrevations [char.traits.specializations] Inconsistent punctuation in subsection abbreviations Dec 28, 2016
@jensmaurer jensmaurer changed the title [char.traits.specializations] Inconsistent punctuation in subsection abbreviations [char.traits.specializations] Inconsistent punctuation in stable names of subsections Dec 28, 2016
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

These are stable names, so we shouldn't change the spelling lightly.

Also, the "specializations" part in the stable name could benefit from some abbreviation, for the benefit of indexes etc.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Dec 29, 2016

I'm not sure if there's a) any way to "resolve" this issue, and b) any problem that needs to be solved here.

@Eelis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Eelis commented Dec 29, 2016

Well, I guess the obvious way to resolve this is to change "wchar.t" to "wchar_t". But if the theory is that such a punctuation fix would tremendously inconvenience people when they read the existing stable name somewhere and try to look it up, then by all means close this ticket (because while I find that thoroughly unconvincing, I'm not interested in arguing that point).

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Dec 29, 2016

I'm still unconvinced that there is a problem here that needs to be solved. Stable names are called stable because we don't generally change them, so I'd like to see a much more convincing analysis spelled out why you think this is needed. Feel free to reopen if you have one.

@tkoeppe tkoeppe closed this as completed Dec 29, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants