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

Fix example in [temp.constr.op]/p4 #3643

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 23, 2020
Merged

Conversation

akrzemi1
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

As far as I can see, the parentheses have no semantic effect in this case.
This is in a core language section, where we usually claim that coding-style harmonization is usually not applied "to show the diversity of the core language" or something to that effect.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Jan 23, 2020
@CaseyCarter
Copy link
Contributor

CaseyCarter commented Jan 23, 2020

As far as I can see, the parentheses have no semantic effect in this case.

The example is ill-formed: (sizeof(T) > 1) && get_value<T>() is not a constraint-logical-or-expression since get_value<T>() is not a primary-expression. (get_value<T>()) is a primary expression, so the example is well-formed after the change.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Thanks, @CaseyCarter, for explaining that. You're right, it seems.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Jan 23, 2020
@jensmaurer jensmaurer merged commit 9b6c64f into cplusplus:master Jan 23, 2020
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.

None yet

4 participants