It's unclear when an Effects: clause is specifying an expression verses a code block. As a result, the trailing ; on intended code blocks ends up looking like a typo. (I've inadvertently 'fixed' a few of these apparent 'typos' myself).

To tell when the Effects is specifying a code block with statement(s) vs. an expression, I propose we follow the convention used in [thread.condition.condvar] (and elsewhere) which uses a : before code blocks. Examples:

    Effects: Equivalent to expr.
    Effects: Equivalent to: code;

OK?

-- in related e-mail correspondence --
from Richard:

• The convention we've been following is that the "Equivalent to" is followed by either an expression (in which case there is a non-code-font period after the expression) or a statement (in which case it is a complete statement, typically terminated by a semicolon, and there is no following period). I've been using inline code when it fits and using a code block otherwise (and in the latter case, an expression loses its trailing period).

from STL:

• As a library developer, my expectation for "Effects: Equivalent to MEOW" is that I can copy-paste MEOW and (modulo the usual stuff, like _Ugly names, ADL defenses, As If Rule, etc.) it is a conforming implementation. If the function has a non-void return type, I expect the return statement to be part of MEOW.