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.

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

[std] Consistently use 'comparison function' #3285

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 11, 2019

Conversation

jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

instead of 'comparison operator function', and
define the term in [over.binary].

Fixes #3284.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

We're using "relational operator function", too, and quite a few places had to be fixed to avoid the term "comparison operator function". I'd mildly favor keeping the term "comparison operator function", since we're actually talking about a certain subset of operator functions here.
Adding a definition in [over.binary] is a good idea; maybe we should also define "relational operator function" and "equality operator function" there.

source/overloading.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Oct 10, 2019
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

I think the term should be "comparison operator function"; it's a special kind of operator function. "comparison function" sounds a bit like it would include memcmp.

@zygoloid zygoloid merged commit 6af984e into cplusplus:master Oct 11, 2019
@jensmaurer jensmaurer deleted the c1 branch October 11, 2019 07:00
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Oct 11, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

missing definition for "comparison operator"
4 participants