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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[basic.lookup.unqual] Clarify 'unqualified name' #4813

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 9, 2021
Merged

[basic.lookup.unqual] Clarify 'unqualified name' #4813

merged 1 commit into from Sep 9, 2021

Conversation

jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Fixes #4812

@opensdh, please have a look.

opensdh
opensdh approved these changes Aug 31, 2021
View reviewed changes
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.

This seems trivially correct, and doesn't conflict with the proposal to define qualified names as the inverse of unqualified ones (perhaps minus names not looked up at all).

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

@tkoeppe, this looks ready to merge.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Sep 9, 2021

Thanks!

@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit d13ed92 into cplusplus:main Sep 9, 2021
@jensmaurer jensmaurer deleted the c35 branch September 9, 2021 15:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@opensdh opensdh opensdh approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[basic.lookup.unqual] Component names in converstion-type-id are unqualified names?
3 participants
@jensmaurer @tkoeppe @opensdh