[intro.execution] Runtime-only UB on unsequenced operations
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
P2996R13 added a new paragraph to [intro.execution] ([intro.execution] p16):
During the evaluation of an expression as a core constant expression ([expr.const]), evaluations of operands of individual operators and of subexpressions of individual expressions that are otherwise either unsequenced or indeterminately sequenced are evaluated in lexical order.
This paragraph seemingly makes the UB specified in [intro.execution] p10 runtime-only (and thus has addressed CWG2192). Do we want to say "runtime-undefined behavior" instead of plain "undefined behavior" in the associated example?
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 P2996R13 and compare [intro.execution] p10 and p16, especially the associated example linked in the issue. Determine whether p16 limits the example's undefined behavior to runtime evaluation, then update the wording decision for the example accordingly.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100