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

[move.sentinel] Remove extraneous "std::" qualification #5792

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Aug 25, 2022

Conversation

hewillk
Copy link
Contributor

@hewillk hewillk commented Aug 25, 2022

No description provided.

Consequently, an iterator type \tcode{I} that returns \tcode{std::string}
by value does not model \tcode{\libconcept{indirectly_writable}<I, std::string>}.
Consequently, an iterator type \tcode{I} that returns \tcode{string}
by value does not model \tcode{\libconcept{indirectly_writable}<I, string>}.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The purpose of the note is to clarify the normative text. Arguably string in this context is less clear than std::string. A clarifying note should be as clear as possible, and we can be more lax about formatting/specification rules in notes. I don't feel strongly about it though.

The other part of this fix looks fine

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reasonable, thanks for the suggestion.

@hewillk hewillk changed the title [iterator.concept.writable, move.sentinel] Remove extraneous "std::" qualification [move.sentinel] Remove extraneous "std::" qualification Aug 25, 2022
@tkoeppe tkoeppe requested a review from jwakely August 25, 2022 19:56
Copy link
Member

@jwakely jwakely left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We're not really consistent about when we do or don't qualify in examples, but this seems fine.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Aug 25, 2022

@jwakely I agree, though given that we're using all the other std-names unqualified here, it's probably clearer to not have one case differ.

@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit aec46d1 into cplusplus:main Aug 25, 2022
@hewillk hewillk deleted the main-iter branch August 26, 2022 01:11
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.

None yet

3 participants