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

"standard conversion sequence" should say "implicit conversion sequence" in some places #2388

Closed
t3nsor opened this issue Nov 7, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

"standard conversion sequence" should say "implicit conversion sequence" in some places #2388

t3nsor opened this issue Nov 7, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
@jensmaurer

Comments

@t3nsor
Copy link
Contributor

t3nsor commented Nov 7, 2018 •
edited

[over.ics.ref]/3

Except for an implicit object parameter, for which see [over.match.funcs], a standard conversion sequence cannot be formed if it requires binding an lvalue reference other than a reference to a non-volatile const type to an rvalue or binding an rvalue reference to an lvalue other than a function lvalue.

[over.ics.ref]/4

Other restrictions on binding a reference to a particular argument that are not based on the types of the reference and the argument do not affect the formation of a standard conversion sequence, however.

Aren't these paragraphs intended to apply to both standard and user-defined conversion sequences?
@CaseyCarter
Copy link
Contributor

CaseyCarter commented Nov 7, 2018 •
edited

"user-defined conversion sequence" is not a term of art used in the Standard. We have user-defined conversions which participate in implicit conversion sequences, but there are no user-defined conversion sequences. An implicit conversion sequence can contain at most one user-defined conversion.

@t3nsor
Copy link
Contributor Author

t3nsor commented Nov 7, 2018

"user-defined conversion sequence" is not a term of art used in the Standard.

Are you serious?

https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/blob/master/source/overloading.tex#L1975

https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/blob/master/source/overloading.tex#L2186

@CaseyCarter
Copy link
Contributor

Are you serious?

I was in fact serious, and in fact incorrect. I'll go back to the Library now.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer self-assigned this Nov 27, 2018
@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Nov 27, 2018
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@jensmaurer jensmaurer

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@CaseyCarter @t3nsor @jensmaurer