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
In 12.4.1 [over.oper.general], the 10-th clause is stated as follows:
An operator function cannot have default arguments (9.3.4.7), except where explicitly stated below. Operator functions cannot have more or fewer parameters than the number required for the corresponding operator, as described in the rest of 12.4.
I think this clause is why that last clause (12.4.4, [over.call]) need to specify
A function call operator function is a function named operator() that is a non-static member function with an arbitrary number of parameters. It may have default arguments. For an expression of the form
Therefore for consistency between operator() and operator[], and be more clear with specification, I think we should specify It may have default arguments in [over.sub] too.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
jensmaurer
added
after-motions
Pull request is to be applied after the pending edits from WG21 straw polls have been applied.
not-editorial
Issue is not deemed editorial; the editorial issue is kept open for tracking.
and removed
after-motions
Pull request is to be applied after the pending edits from WG21 straw polls have been applied.
labels
Nov 30, 2021
See P2128R6
In 12.4.1 [over.oper.general], the 10-th clause is stated as follows:
I think this clause is why that last clause (12.4.4, [over.call]) need to specify
Therefore for consistency between
operator()
andoperator[]
, and be more clear with specification, I think we should specifyIt may have default arguments
in [over.sub] too.Originally posted by @Mick235711 in #4997 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: