[intro.memory] Implication of the note for implementation-managed "memory locations"
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
Currently a note in [intro.memory] (originally introduced by N2429) says:
[Note 2: Various features of the language, such as references and virtual functions, might involve additional memory locations that are not accessible to programs but are managed by the implementation. — end note]
This note seemingly implies that such underlying implementation details are scalar objects or bit-field sequences (per the definition of memory location).
Such implication looks weird despite not being actual overspecification. If this note is considered not really helpful (because such a "memory location" isn't supposed to be observable, perhaps), I guess we should remove it.
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 in the [intro.memory] section and compare the implementation-managed “memory locations” note with the definition of memory location referenced in the issue. Resolve whether the note should be removed, then update the draft wording once the intended resolution is agreed.
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
- 45/100