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

[dcl.init.general] Fix misapplied term 'block variable' #4482

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 15, 2021

Conversation

jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Block-scope externs are in view here, but those are not
block variables, because their target scope is an
enclosing namespace scope.

Fixes #4478

Block-scope externs are in view here, but those are not
block variables, because their target scope is an
enclosing namespace scope.
Copy link
Contributor

@opensdh opensdh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like this word order better than the original suggestion in the issue, although I think "it" could work fine here; the subject of the sentence is the obvious antecedent, and there isn't another meaningful interpretation available anyway.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

@opensdh, thanks for the comment. Elsewhere, we had troubles with "it" being sometimes obfuscating, so let's stick with the super-obvious $D$ here.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Feb 15, 2021

OK, let's take this and hope that nobody asks for a definition of "inhabitiation".

@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit 80c5fdf into cplusplus:master Feb 15, 2021
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

"inhabit" is a well-defined term these days [basic.scope.scope] p2.3

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.

[dcl.init.general] p5 wording does not seem to match the intent
3 participants