You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For a single search([basic.lookup.general] p3), we require the name is bound in a scope. Rather, in [basic.scope.scope] p4, we say the name is bound to a declaration. It means, as a normal case, a name introduced by a declaration is bound to it and is also bound to its target scope. However, the meaning couldn't be phrased in the common rule [basic.scope.scope] p2
Unless otherwise specified:
[...]
Any names (re)introduced by a declaration are bound to it in its target scope.
In my mind, the rule only says the name is bound to the declaration but didn't phrase that the name is also bound to the target scope. Could we decompose the rule into two common bullets?
Unless otherwise specified:
[...]
Any names (re)introduced by a declaration are bound to it
Any names first introduced by a declaration are bound to its target scope
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
For a single search([basic.lookup.general] p3), we require the name is bound in a scope. Rather, in [basic.scope.scope] p4, we say the name is bound to a declaration. It means, as a normal case, a name introduced by a declaration is bound to it and is also bound to its target scope. However, the meaning couldn't be phrased in the common rule [basic.scope.scope] p2
In my mind, the rule only says the name is bound to the declaration but didn't phrase that the name is also bound to the target scope. Could we decompose the rule into two common bullets?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: