[temp.expl.spec] p10 What if the declarator-id in an explicit specialization is not a template-id?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
[temp.expl.spec] p10 says
A trailing template-argument can be left unspecified in the template-id naming an explicit function template specialization provided it can be deduced ([temp.deduct.decl]).
This rule cannot expound the intent implied by the example following it. the declarator-id is not a template-id but an identifier. The rule might be changed to
A trailing template-argument can be left unspecified in an explicit specialization of a function template or of a member function template provided it can be deduced ([temp.deduct.decl]).. If all template arguments can be deduced, the empty template argument list <> may be omitted.
In the same manner as [temp.explicit] p8.
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 [temp.expl.spec] p10 alongside the cited example and [temp.explicit] p8, then compare the wording with [temp.deduct.decl]. Update the paragraph so it covers the described declarator-id case and matches the intent of the example; verify that the resulting standard text is consistent with p8.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Newbie friendliness
- 52/100