[basic.start.dynamic] didn't state the situation for the initialization of the non-block thread storage duration inline variable
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
[basic.start.dynamic] p5 and [basic.start.dynamic] p6 phrase the dynamic initialization of the non-block static storage duration non-inline and inline variable, respectively. However, we just state the dynamic initialization for non-block thread storage duration non-inline variable in [basic.start.dynamic] p7 while we did not phrase the situation for the dynamic initialization of the non-block inline variable with thread storage duration without using another paragraph. Does [basic.start.dynamic] omit to phrase such a situation? Or, Do we deliberate to leave the case with an underspecified situation?
inline thread_local int v = 0;
int main(){}
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 [basic.start.dynamic] paragraphs 5–7 and compare the wording for non-inline and inline variables with static and thread storage duration. Check the inline thread_local example against the clause; done when the standard text explicitly resolves whether this initialization case is specified or intentionally left underspecified.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100