[depr.atomics.volatile] Use tcode to call out template name #6213
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
There is no such thing as an "atomic specialization", so the only valid reading of this text is that "atomic" refers to the class template `atomic`. This PR makes the intent clear with code font and a cross reference, and I believe is editorial. However, the LWG chair might want to confirm whether the change of font counts as a normative change that deserves LWG review.
jwakely
approved these changes
Mar 28, 2023
jensmaurer
approved these changes
Mar 28, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There is no such thing as an "atomic specialization", so the only valid reading of this text is that "atomic" refers to the class template
atomic.This PR makes the intent clear with code font and a cross reference, and I believe is editorial. However, the LWG chair might want to confirm whether the change of font counts as a normative change that deserves LWG review.