Skip to content

Reword implementation-defined nature of <> and "" for #include #928

Open
@AlisdairM

Description

@AlisdairM
Contributor

The implementation-defined nature of the contents for #include directives vary slightly, depending on whether "" or <> form is used. However, the term 'implementation-defined' is used for only the first form, and the second merely augments it. This makes it tricky to create meaningful cross-references in the index of implementation-defined behaviors.

Activity

AlisdairM

AlisdairM commented on Oct 8, 2024

@AlisdairM
ContributorAuthor

Note to remind myself of the specific issue: there is a trailing note that the appearance of a " character in a h-char-sequence is also implementation-defined, but phased without the term "implementation-defined" to create the entry into the index of implementation defined behaviors.

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

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

        Participants

        @AlisdairM

        Issue actions

          Reword implementation-defined nature of <> and "" for #include · Issue #928 · cplusplus/draft