[class.union.anon] p1 All implicitly declared special member functions for anonymous union violate that rule
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
[class.union.anon] p1 explicitly says
Each member-declaration in the member-specification of an anonymous union shall either define one or more public non-static data members or be a static_assert-declaration. Nested types, anonymous unions, and functions shall not be declared within an anonymous union.
Special member functions are also functions. However, the implicitly declared special members didn't explicitly reject the consideration for anonymous unions(as long as, there is no user-declared one or satisfy some conditions).
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
Start by reading [class.union.anon] p1 in the draft and compare its restriction on functions with the treatment of implicitly declared special member functions. Determine whether the wording needs clarification or correction for anonymous unions. Done means the standard text consistently addresses those implicitly declared members.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp, tex
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100