From 443244072453276034 X-Google-Thread: f78e5,57f37be32367f817 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.cs.univ-paris8.fr!newsfeed.vmunix.org!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!stump.algebra.com!devnull From: AlbertoBarbati@libero.it (Alberto Ganesh Barbati) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Defect report: [dcl.constexpr]/5 constexpr and templates Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 21:41:39 GMT Organization: [Infostrada] Lines: 38 Sender: mail2news@demon.net Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: news.news.demon.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1194385306 29596 158.152.254.254 (6 Nov 2007 21:41:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 21:41:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: std-c++@mailman.ucar.edu X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CAJtoMEfBRsBm/2dsb2JhbACQSg X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at csse.unimelb.edu.au X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.csse.unimelb.edu.au (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id lA6LfdnF029863; Wed, 7 Nov 2007 08:41:39 +1100 (EST) X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 22:16:12 MET X-Delivered-To: std-c++@mailman.ucar.edu X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.csse.unimelb.edu.au: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-SMTP-Auth: no X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:9551 Greg Herlihy ha scritto: > > On 11/5/07 11:24 AM, in article I3KXi.161547$%k.303426@twister2.libero.it, > "Alberto Ganesh Barbati" wrote: > >> >> While I agree that the term "function template" might be stretched to >> also include member function templates, including members of a class >> template is IMHO a bit too far, and AFAIK it would be the first time in >> the standard that such a thing would be made. > > The term "template function" would be more apt in this context, since a > template function may refer either to an instantiation of a function > template or function generated by the instantiation of a class template. > > The following active defect report addresses the inconsistent function > template terminology in the current Standard: > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2450.html#105 > According to the resolution of DR105, the term "function template" has been consistently removed from the standard wording in favor of the more precise terms "template function" (1.3.11 and 13.3.1 and others) or "member functions of class templates and member function templates" (9.3). Why would you want to re-introduce the deprecated term? I believe my proposal goes precisely in the direction of the resolution of DR105. Ganesh --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]