Bring pointer terminology up to date #6174
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Why is this edtiorial? Unless it is obvious that a change is non-normative (e.g. because it changes a note or example, or fixes a typo), there should be some rationale explaining the intended meaning and why that's unambiguous, and why the change retains that meaning. Otherwise such change requests should probably be CWG issues. |
lprv
changed the title
|
Updated with an explanation (and some extra changes). |
jwakely
reviewed
Mar 13, 2023
Specifically, in: * [expr.prim.lambda.closure]/8, /11 * [expr.const]/13.3 * [temp.arg.nontype]/3
|
@jensmaurer I think some CWG input here would be good, but it seems like a nice improvement. |
|
The first part (about lambdas) feels editorial, the other parts fix normative defects and thus should be addressed by a CWG issue. |
|
CWG meeting consensus Nov 11: good |
tkoeppe
added
the
after-motions
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pointer values are not addresses ([basic.compound]/3), this updates some of the old text to use proper terminology. The intent of the wording is clear, and this PR does not change its normative meaning.
I'm not sure if changing 'address of' to 'pointer representing the address of' is an improvement, so the following are left untouched:
Also, in [temp.arg.nontype]/3, the text should probably also include past-the-end pointers, but that's not editorial.