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
Motions 2019 11 cwg 2: P1968R0 Core Language Working Group "tentatively ready" Issues #3485
Conversation
CWG2419: What about "hypothetical n-th array element", except that gets us into the 0-th war. Maybe. |
It's an improvement, but would have to be the "(n+1)th" element, which gets messy. I went with the existing wording that we have for this in [basic.compound] which uses x[n] to describe the element. |
648dcee
to
23a520d
Compare
…on/deallocation functions [expr.new] Replace "argument list" with intended "argument".
…t arrays [expr.eq] Update an additional footnote that was missed by the wording changes.
identify array elements. [expr.add] [expr.rel] [expr.eq] [numeric.ops.midpoint] Remove unused name "x" from footnote.
The newest wording here is that in [expr.add], which uses "array element i of |
[basic.stc.static] Also update "shall last" -> "lasts" here.
23a520d
to
fd20a44
Compare
Fixes #3395.
Fixes #2664.
Issues:
In [expr.add]/bullet 4.2, and, after applying CWG2419, in [numeric.ops.midpoint]/p5 and [expr.rel]/p4, we have the wording:
"a pointer to a hypothetical array element n"
This reads like n is the hypothetical array element, but n is the size of the array.
Can we reword this?