Skip to content

Conversation

@eisenwave
Copy link
Member

This PR cleans up a few wording discrepancies in the introduction to compound types:

  1. We don't like to say that "functions return references". Any such case would mean that the function is declared with reference return type, but the reference would be transformed into an lvalue or xvalue designating the object upon the call. If we just say "a result", we keep it vague and correct.

  2. The list of what classes contain tries to be exhaustive without much benefit. We can just say that classes contain class members, which does not miss many things not listed here, such as static_assert, template, etc.

Copy link
Member

@jensmaurer jensmaurer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah. Intro stuff that nobody looks at to get normative guidance.

@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit a18040f into cplusplus:main Dec 17, 2024
2 checks passed
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.

3 participants