cplusplus / cplusplus/draft

What is "the full-expression of its initialization"? CWG3009

Open
#4,798 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

cwg not-editorial
Dominant language
TeX
Stars
221
Forks
813
Avg merge
16h 4m
Merged PRs (30d)
36

Description

The term full-expression is defined in [basic.exec.intro.execution] p5

A full-expression is

  • an unevaluated operand,
  • a constant-expression ([expr.const]),
  • an immediate invocation ([expr.const]),
  • an init-declarator ([dcl.decl]) or a mem-initializer ([class.base.init]), including the constituent expressions of the initializer,
  • an invocation of a destructor generated at the end of the lifetime of an object other than a temporary object ([class.temporary]) whose lifetime has not been extended, or
  • an expression that is not a subexpression of another expression and that is not otherwise part of a full-expression.

None of the above bullets is related to "initialization". In my opinion, It seems the term "initialization" is a sequence of expressions whose invocations would initialize an entity. Although, "initialization" has no formal definition in the standard. Consider this example

struct A{
    constexpr A(int){}
};
struct B{
   constexpr B(A const& v):v_(v){}
   A v_;
};
constexpr B b = A(0);  //#1

According to the definition for full-expression, the full-expression in the declaration at #1 should be its init-declarator(namely, b = A(0)).

The [basic.exec.intro.execution] p5 also says

For an initializer, performing the initialization of the entity (including evaluating default member initializers of an aggregate) is also considered part of the full-expression.

Hence, "the full-expression of its initialization" at #1 refers to the init-declarator? [expr.const] p2 says

the full-expression of its initialization is a constant expression when interpreted as a constant-expression

While the definition for constant expression is defined at [expr.const] p11

A constant expression is either a glvalue core constant expression that refers to an entity that is a permitted result of a constant expression (as defined below), or a prvalue core constant expression whose value satisfies the following constraints

Anyhow, the constant expression should first be an expression on grammar. A full-expression is a concept that is convenient to name a language structure that is not necessary to be an expression. As aforementioned, the full-expression is an init-declarator, how could it be a constant expression?

The full-expression at #1 comprises the implicitly call of B::B(A const& v), temporary materialization conversion on A(0) and the destruction of that temporary object. I think the intent is saying that these expressions should satisfy the requirement of a constant expression. However, the current wording is obscure to read and a bit contradictory. The same issue https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62253964/what-is-full-expression-of-initialization

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with [basic.exec.intro.execution] p5 and [expr.const] p2 and p11, then work through the #1 example and the cited Stack Overflow discussion. Determine how “the full-expression of its initialization” relates to an init-declarator and constant expression, and clarify the standard wording so the relationship is unambiguous.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
cpp
Domain
compilers
Issue type
Documentation
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
32/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.