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
S1 is a proper subsequence of S2 (comparing the conversion sequences in the canonical form defined by [over.ics.scs], excluding any Lvalue Transformation; the identity conversion sequence is considered to be a subsequence of any non-identity conversion sequence) or, if not that,
It seems "proper subsequence" has a stricter meaning than "subsequence". The intent of this provision is to say that [over.ics.rank] p3.2.1 will be applied to if S1 is an identity conversion sequence while S2 is a non-identity conversion sequence. However, according to the sentence in the parenthesis: the identity conversion sequence is considered to be a subsequence of any non-identity conversion sequence. It did not say it's a "proper subsequence".
Should we change the definition to that
S1 is a proper subsequence of S2 (comparing the conversion sequences in the canonical form defined by [over.ics.scs], excluding any Lvalue Transformation; the identity conversion sequence is considered to be a proper subsequence of any non-identity conversion sequence) or, if not that,
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
[over.ics.rank] p3.2.1
It seems "proper subsequence" has a stricter meaning than "subsequence". The intent of this provision is to say that [over.ics.rank] p3.2.1 will be applied to if S1 is an identity conversion sequence while S2 is a non-identity conversion sequence. However, according to the sentence in the parenthesis: the identity conversion sequence is considered to be a subsequence of any non-identity conversion sequence. It did not say it's a "proper subsequence".
Should we change the definition to that
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: