-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 802
[func.wrap.func.con], [func.wrap.move.class], [func.wrap.copy.class], [any.class.general] Reword avoidance of 'dynamically allocated memory' as 'nesting an object within' #7328
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
Open
eisenwave
wants to merge
1
commit into
cplusplus:main
Choose a base branch
from
eisenwave:purge-dynamically-allocated
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The first "an object" seems both vague and unhelpful. Surely there is already some object nested within the
any-- but the point is that there's a very specific object (namely the one that the user wants to store) should be nested within theany. The original wording was clearer about that since it at least said "contained value".Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm a bit confused about your comment. This is just applying the wording idiom that LWG came up with and replacing a term that is entirely undefined within the standard. That seems like a clear improvement (arguably an objective bug fix).
The part
... remains unchanged, so why are you pointing out that its existence makes only the old wording clearer? Did you misread and come to the conclusion that that part is being deleted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking at LWG4141, LWG seems comfortable with the "nested within" idiom.
@jwakely do you have an opinion on this PR?