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
[reverse.iter.cons] Indent consistently with the parent subclause #2578
Conversation
Barring other changes to [iterators], this is ready. |
Thanks, I've rearranged the commits a bit, please rebase. |
73e05e3
to
a71b7d7
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good.
@tkoeppe, seems this is ready to go. |
source/iterators.tex
Outdated
inline constexpr bool disable_sized_sentinel<reverse_iterator<Iterator1>, | ||
reverse_iterator<Iterator2>> = true; | ||
requires (!SizedSentinel<Iterator1, Iterator2>) | ||
inline constexpr bool disable_sized_sentinel<reverse_iterator<Iterator1>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The existing indentation is correct:
- the requires clause should be indented 2 spaces from the line it's continuing (the template-head)
- the variable declaration is a definition, so does not need indentation.
This style would also be acceptable, but is generally used only for non-defining declarations:
template<class Iterator1, class Iterator2>
requires (!SizedSentinel<Iterator1, Iterator2>)
inline constexpr bool disable_sized_sentinel<reverse_iterator<Iterator1>,
reverse_iterator<Iterator2>> = true;
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Dropped that commit.
a71b7d7
to
8dfe4c5
Compare
No description provided.