The requirement of the trailing requires-clause in function-definition
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
Since in p1971r0 where CA378 remove constrained non-template functions, the concrete rule is located in [dcl.decl.general] p4
The optional requires-clause ([temp.pre]) in an init-declarator or member-declarator shall be present only if the declarator declares a templated function ([dcl.fct]). When present after a declarator, the requires-clause is called the trailing requires-clause. The trailing requires-clause introduces the constraint-expression that results from interpreting its constraint-logical-or-expression as a constraint-expression.
However, it is just about requires-clause in an init-declarator or member-declarator. Whereas, function-definition is a distinct grammar that differs from them. How about the trailing requires-clause in a function-definition? Should it have had the same treatment with that in [dcl.decl.general] p4?
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 [dcl.decl.general] p4 alongside the function-definition grammar and the cited p1971r0 change. Determine whether the trailing requires-clause in a function-definition needs equivalent wording, then resolve the standards question and update the draft wording if required.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100