[expr] Missing definition of "operand" (other than "unevaluated operand")
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
P3-Other
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
As reflected in cplusplus/CWG#371, it seems that the definition of the term operand is missing, and currently only unevaluated operand is defined in [expr.context].
It seems possible to me to add the definition editorially.
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
Review the definition of “unevaluated operand” in [[expr.context]] and the discussion in cplusplus/CWG#371. Determine the appropriate editorial location for defining “operand,” then verify that the C++ draft consistently has the intended definition.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- tex
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100