[alg.shift], [fpos.operations] Annotate "old" requirements with \oldc… #2212
Conversation
source/algorithms.tex
Outdated
| @@ -3603,10 +3603,10 @@ | |||
| \pnum | |||
| \requires | |||
| The type of \tcode{*first} shall satisfy | |||
| the \tcode{MoveAssignable} requirements. | |||
| the \oldconcept{MoveAssignable} requirements. | |||
| \tcode{ForwardIterator} shall meet | |||
| the requirements of a bidirectional iterator\iref{bidirectional.iterators} or | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
\oldconcept{BidirectionalIterator}? (and next paragraph too)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It wouldn't hurt to change this to shall meet the \oldconcept{BidirectionalIterator} requirements\iref{bidirectional.iterators}, but it's certainly not the only such occurrence. We need to audit the entire library for colloquialisms and replace them with proper requirement names to avoid confusion over whether e.g. "bidirectional iterator" means something that meets the old requirements, or the new requirements, or both.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The "colloquialism" was in fact the proper way to state such requirements. "bidirectional iterator" was not a CamelCasedRequirement before you made it one :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was in [algorithms] =P
CaseyCarter
force-pushed
the
motions-2018-06-lwg-28
branch
from
a35856c
to
18c5c80
Compare
zygoloid
force-pushed
the
motions-2018-06-lwg-28
branch
from
6678126
to
cba35cc
Compare
CaseyCarter
force-pushed
the
motions-2018-06-lwg-28
branch
from
18c5c80
to
d26ecdb
Compare
…oncept
Fixes a few occurrences introduced by recently merged motions.