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

[defns.well.formed] Current definition of "well-formed" might be imprecise #4467

Closed
frederick-vs-ja opened this issue Jan 15, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4484
Closed

[defns.well.formed] Current definition of "well-formed" might be imprecise #4467

frederick-vs-ja opened this issue Jan 15, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #4484
Assignees

Comments

@frederick-vs-ja
Copy link
Contributor

Currently the definition of "well-defined" just covers "the one-definition rule". However, there are many other cases that a program is ill-formed, no diagnostic required without violation of the ODR (e.g. instantiating a template when its associate constraints are satisfied but the corresponding standard concepts are not modeled).
Should we improve the wording?

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Jan 15, 2021
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Yes, there seems to be room for improvement.

Maybe just "... and semantic rules where a diagnostic is not required"

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Editorial meeting:
Suggestion: "C++ program constructed according to the syntax and semantic rules"
Have CWG review it.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Jan 29, 2021
@jensmaurer jensmaurer self-assigned this Feb 5, 2021
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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants