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

Consider updating "Specification-Style-Guidelines" #3684

Closed
Dani-Hub opened this issue Feb 15, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed

Consider updating "Specification-Style-Guidelines" #3684

Dani-Hub opened this issue Feb 15, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@Dani-Hub
Copy link
Member

During the C++20 standardization, some parts of the recommendations should be updated to respect the language features such as the three-way- comparison operator and to reflect some Library convention refinements.

  1. "Subclause headings" doesn't currently say anything about three-way comparison operators. Should the specification of <=> declarations go into [*.cmp] when combined with others? (I guess so). But what should be the recommended heading/label name when a single operator<=> is within a subclause? Should it be [*.rel] then? Or [*.spaceship]?

  2. The library has now decided (via Marshall's Mandating proposals) to replace in elements that express normative requirements (Mandates, Preconditions, and Constraints) every usage of "shall" by "matter of fact" wording. It would be good, if the guidelines could reflect this change, e.g. in "Writing "Let" in a function description", replace

"Mandates: T shall be CopyConstructible."

by either of

"Mandates: is_convertible_v<T> is true."

or

"Mandates: T meets the Cpp17CopyConstructible requirements."

(The second one is based on "Requirements expressed by concepts")

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Wiki page updated.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants