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

[lib] Parameter names in synopses #3255

Open
jensmaurer opened this issue Oct 1, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

[lib] Parameter names in synopses #3255

jensmaurer opened this issue Oct 1, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

While we strive to keep the declaration in a synopsis the same as the one in an \itemdecl, we're inconsistent (at least) for copy/move constructors and copy/move assignment operators.

Personally, I feel that copy/move operations speak for themselves through the declaration and don't need a distracting parameter name in the synopsis, in particular if the function is defaulted or deleted. (We need one for the \itemdecl, of course, because we need to talk about the source of the copy/move.)

See #3230 for a specific case.
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Oct 1, 2019
@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Oct 1, 2019

I agree 100% with removing parameter names from defaulted and deleted functions, and from special member functions where we declare them in the synopsis but don't have an \itemdecl for them.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Oct 2, 2019
Merged
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

Editorial meeting: \itemdecl should not introduce primary information; it's just a heading. Parameter names might meet that bar. Arbitrarily picking a name seems reasonable. Investigate prevailing existing style. Suggest to use "other" consistently.
We allow a difference for itemdecl vs. synopsis, but if a parameter name is present, it should be the same in both places. Having a parameter name that is an abbreviation of the type name is not useful in the synopsis.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Oct 21, 2019
@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Nov 22, 2019

[counted.iterator] has this in the class synopsis:

constexpr counted_iterator(I x, iter_difference_t<I> n);

[counted.iter.const] has a different parameter name:

constexpr counted_iterator(I i, iter_difference_t<I> n);

@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Jan 12, 2024
Merged
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
@jwakely @jensmaurer