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
[cstdint.syn.2] is not in line with intention #3521
Comments
I think this is the subject of long-standing library issue http://wg21.link/lwg2820, which is just never quite important enough to be handled. But we should definitely make some changes here. I venture to say that those aren't editorial, though, and should be handled by LWG. |
@tkoeppe I don't think it's the same as (pun intended) that, and I do think it's editorial. The topic of this issue is not the macros, which can't be in or out of namespace std anyway, because they're macros. The issue is that "the same as" suggests "declares the same types, in the same namespace" i.e. |
What the words mean is that after including both |
In such case, the wording would be more like:
then it makes distinction of the two types.
are different definitions |
Or "every typedef declared in this header denotes the same type as the corresponding typedef in the C standard library header |
@jwakely: yes, good point, thanks. I always took "same as" to mean that "the type defined by the alias is the same type (not type name!) as that defined by C; I didn't interpret "same as" to appertain to the declarations. The clarification seems useful (though I also don't think it's terribly misleading at the moment). |
Should I create PR with @jwakely wording for that? |
Sure, go ahead (with the "blanked wording for all |
pull request created: |
It there really an issue? [extern.types]/1 (has been existing since C++98) reads:
|
I find
to not fully reflect the intention as the
would mean, that cstdint also needs to define non std:: version of aliases. This is also against:
[library.5]
I propose to reword the [cstdint.syn.2] or remove it (since library.5 already handles this case).
In case of rewording it could sound like:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: