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

Improper usage of "comparison operator" #612

Closed
Dani-Hub opened this issue Jan 31, 2016 · 0 comments
Closed

Improper usage of "comparison operator" #612

Dani-Hub opened this issue Jan 31, 2016 · 0 comments
Assignees
@jensmaurer

Comments

@Dani-Hub
Copy link
Member

There are several usages in the library part of the standard denoting the term "comparison operator", such as:

  1. [allocator.requirements] p5 ("No constructor, comparison operator, [..]")
  2. [syserr] header <system_error> synopsis: "// 19.5.4 Comparison operators:"
  4. [tuple.rel] p10
  5. [util.smartptr.shared.cmp] p3
  6. [comparisons] p1
  8. [unord.req] p12
  9. [forwardlist.overview] p3 (forward_list synopsis)

There exists only the term "comparison function", defined in [defns.comparison] and explicitly referred to in footnote 162:

"To save space, items that do not apply to a class are omitted. For example, if a class does not specify any comparison functions, there will be no “Comparison functions” subclause."

The above list has IMO only one normative usage of the term "comparison operator" (bullet (1)), but it would make the standard look more consistent, if all listed usages of "comparison operator" would be replaced by "comparison function", especially in the light of [defns.comparison] and footnote 162.

Please let me know if I need to open an LWG issue for this.
jensmaurer added a commit to jensmaurer/draft that referenced this issue Dec 13, 2016
@jensmaurer
[lib] Use 'comparison function', not 'comparison operator'.
54c1ee7 
When talking about an operator function, use the term defined in
[defns.comparison].

Fixes cplusplus#612.
@jensmaurer jensmaurer mentioned this issue Dec 13, 2016
Merged
@jensmaurer jensmaurer self-assigned this Dec 13, 2016
tkoeppe pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 13, 2016
@jensmaurer @tkoeppe
[lib] Use 'comparison function', not 'comparison operator'. (#1224)
a3f3773 
When talking about an operator function, use the term defined in
[defns.comparison].

Fixes #612.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@jensmaurer jensmaurer

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@Dani-Hub @jensmaurer