[dcl.fct] Description of abbreviated function templates should not use "equivalent" CWG2802
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
They are functionally equivalent but not equivalent in the [temp.over.link] sense, as the example immediately below points out:
We should probably find a better word (or maybe just use "functionally equivalent"?)
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Read source/declarations.tex around lines 3615-3620 and compare the example around lines 3650-3651. Determine wording that distinguishes the described relationship from equivalence in [temp.over.link], then update the description and verify the surrounding text remains consistent.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- tex
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100