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

Reorder [basic] before [lex] #2252

Open
zygoloid opened this issue Jul 7, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Reorder [basic] before [lex] #2252

zygoloid opened this issue Jul 7, 2018 · 4 comments
Projects
C++23 clause renumbering
Milestone
C++26

Comments

@zygoloid
Copy link
Member

zygoloid commented Jul 7, 2018

[basic] would make more sense if it appeared prior to [lex] rather than after. Conversely, [lex.separate] and [lex.phases] really belong in [basic], not [lex]. (We should also consider moving [cpp] to immediately after [lex] so that the top-level clauses are in a more logical phase-of-translation order, but keeping it in exile -- as an appendix of sorts -- has some merit too.)
@zygoloid zygoloid added this to the C++23 milestone Jul 7, 2018
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Literally minutes after releasing a draft with the large C++20 renumbering applied do we come up with even further large-scale rearrangements.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jul 8, 2018

Well, there's always force-pushing :-)

@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Sep 6, 2018
Closed
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

jensmaurer commented Jul 16, 2021 •
edited

Maybe also move the preprocessor section near lex or merge both into a new "lexical processing" clause.

[basic] has some details that need to move later, e.g. allocation/deallocation function details should go to "Declarations".

Operator overloading [over.oper] should partially move to [expr] and to "Declarations".

@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Nov 23, 2021
Closed
8 tasks
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed this from the C++23 milestone Feb 6, 2022
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added this to the C++26 milestone Feb 23, 2022
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

I have reservations about moving [basic] before [lex]; this needs more internal restructuring.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Feb 23, 2022
Open
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
C++23 clause renumbering
  
Open
Milestone
C++26
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@zygoloid @tkoeppe @jensmaurer