[stmt.if] Add an example for the value-dependence of the condition after instantiation
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
It seems that the rule "if the condition is not value-dependent after its instantiation" mainly affects implicit lambda captures of generic lambdas.
If I understand correctly, the intent is that the condition may still remain value-dependent when determining implicit lambda captures but won't be value-dependent after the instantiation of the lambda body. Should we add a proper example explaining this?
CC-ing @jensmaurer @zygoloid
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 at the [stmt.if] rule and review the issue's discussion of implicit captures in generic lambdas. Add a self-contained example explaining value-dependence of the condition after instantiation, with wording that makes the intended rule clear.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp, tex
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 38/100