"potentially evaluated expression" vs "potentially-evaluated subexpression"
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
P2-Bug
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 16h 4m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
#8658 changed the former to not hyphenate "potentially evaluated". [intro.execution] defines the term "potentially-evaluated subexpression", so that term is still hyphenated. And then [expr.const.defns]/2 juxtaposes the two terms for maximum contrast.
Should the latter be unhyphenated for consistency?
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
Compare the terminology in [intro.execution] and [expr.const.defns]/2 with the change from #8658. Decide whether “potentially-evaluated subexpression” should also be unhyphenated for consistency, then update the draft wording if that decision is accepted.
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
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 48/100