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

[expr.call] Say "implicit object parameter" instead of "this parameter" #6803

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

frederick-vs-ja
Copy link
Contributor

Separated from #6748.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Apr 25, 2024
@frederick-vs-ja

This comment was marked as resolved.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Apr 26, 2024
@@ -3345,7 +3345,7 @@
If the function is an implicit object member
function,
the object expression of the class member access shall be a glvalue and
the \keyword{this} parameter of the function\iref{expr.prim.this}
the implicit object parameter of the function\iref{over.match.funcs}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this right? https://eel.is/c++draft/over.match.funcs#general-4 says that the implicit object parameter is of type "reference to X" -- how can you initialize that with a pointer to the obeject of the call?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah. And also, referring to overload resolution for something affecting the actual call doesn't feel good.

Retracting my approval.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems that we can say the implicit object parameter is initialized with the aforementioned glvalue.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer self-requested a review April 26, 2024 12:02
And correct the initialization of the implicit object parameter.
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