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
make-unsigned-like and make-unsigned-like-t are too similar #3300
Comments
jensmaurer
added
the
decision-required
A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required.
label
Oct 16, 2019
Editorial meeting: When we have exposition-only foo and foo-t, their relationship should be the same as any other bar and bar_t. That's not the case here. Rename "make-unsigned-like" to "to-unsigned-like". |
jensmaurer
removed
the
decision-required
A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required.
label
Oct 21, 2019
CaseyCarter
added a commit
to CaseyCarter/draft
that referenced
this issue
Oct 21, 2019
CaseyCarter
added a commit
to CaseyCarter/draft
that referenced
this issue
Nov 25, 2019
CaseyCarter
added a commit
to CaseyCarter/draft
that referenced
this issue
Jan 24, 2020
CaseyCarter
added a commit
to CaseyCarter/draft
that referenced
this issue
Jan 24, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
[ranges.syn]/1 defines an exposition only function
make-unsigned-like
and an exposition-only metafunctionmake-unsigned-like-t
. These two names are hard to distinguish, doubly so with an argument list:It would help somewhat if
make-unsigned-like-t
were treated as an exposition-only alias template:but ideally the names themselves should be more distinct as well. @jwakely suggests renaming
make-unsigned-like
toas-unsigned-like
orto-unsigned-like
, which preserves the intended similarity betweenmake-unsigned-like-t
andmake_unsigned_t
.(As discussed in #3299 (comment)).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: