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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Incorrect comment in [intro.execution] p. 12 #1706

Closed
RazvanAM opened this issue Aug 13, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Incorrect comment in [intro.execution] p. 12 #1706

RazvanAM opened this issue Aug 13, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@RazvanAM
Copy link

In this paragraph there is the following code sample:

S s1(1); // full-expression is call of S​::​S(int)

Why is the full-expression the call to the constructor and not the entire construct (init-declarator) itself? (In the same paragraph (p 12.3) it says that an init-declarator is a full-expression.)
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

jensmaurer commented Sep 15, 2017 •
edited

What's the difference in this case?

@RazvanAM
Copy link
Author

RazvanAM commented Sep 19, 2017 •
edited

There is no difference in behaviour, I think it is just a minor inconsistency in wording.
I tracked the evolution of the paragraph describing full-expressions and I discovered that the code sample that I cited was written even before the passage: "If a language construct is defined to produce an implicit call of a function, a use of the language construct is considered to be an expression for the purposes of this definition" was added. And those samples remained the same, even after other changes were made to the paragraph. I actually sent you an e-mail regarding this (at Jens.Maurer@gmx.net, as I saw you handled a change to paragraphs which describe full-expressions: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0507r0.html).

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Oct 20, 2017
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Editorial meeting consensus: "is" -> "comprises"

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Nov 7, 2017
jensmaurer added a commit to jensmaurer/draft that referenced this issue Nov 11, 2017
@jensmaurer
[intro.execution] Clarify full-expression in example.
abf6f7f 
Fixes cplusplus#1706.
@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Nov 11, 2017
Merged
zygoloid pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 12, 2017
@jensmaurer @zygoloid
[intro.execution] Clarify full-expression in example.
04c4e83 
Fixes #1706.
AaronBallman pushed a commit to AaronBallman/draft that referenced this issue Nov 15, 2017
@jensmaurer
[intro.execution] Clarify full-expression in example.
68e7e19 
Fixes cplusplus#1706.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@RazvanAM @jensmaurer