[over.call.object] Note has counterfactual statement re: surrogate functions and overload resolution
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
In N4910 [over.call.object] paragraph 3, note 1 (in part) says:
The conversion function from which the surrogate call function was derived will be used in the conversion sequence for that parameter since it converts the implied object argument to the appropriate function pointer or reference required by that first parameter.
This is not true. Overload resolution can prefer a different conversion operator because the conversion function from which the surrogate call function was derived is not the best viable function. See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81547.
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 with N4910 [over.call.object], paragraph 3, note 1, and compare its statement about surrogate call functions with the overload-resolution behavior described in GCC bug 81547. Determine how the note should be corrected so it no longer makes the disputed claim, then verify the wording against the surrounding standard text.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- tex
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100