-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 804
P3016R6 Resolve inconsistencies in begin/end for valarray and braced initializer lists #8544
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
AlisdairM
wants to merge
7
commits into
cplusplus:main
Choose a base branch
from
AlisdairM:p3016r6_inconsistent_begin_end
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3706767
P3016R6 Resolve inconsistencies in begin/end for valarray and braced …
AlisdairM 49a2748
[iterator.range] Turn list of headers into a table
AlisdairM 6e8a21a
Update source/iterators.tex
AlisdairM c57c177
Update source/iterators.tex
AlisdairM 05d2858
Update source/numerics.tex
AlisdairM fcda795
[support.initlist.range] Removed section in xrefdelta.tex
AlisdairM a373bef
[valarray.range] Correct order of arguments to indexlibrarymember
AlisdairM File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To be honest, I liked the style in the paper better,
which is
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We usually break after the template-head, and then maybe also break later in the declaration. But I think the
<iterator>synopsis is unusual (unique even?) in doing:template<class C> constexpr autoThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i.e. I think it would be move conventional to do:
and if that doesn't fit, then something like:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like the more conventional style, but deliberately followed the example of breaking already used throughout this clause. Should I apply our more usual breaking pattern to this header as whole, as a distinct commit?