Repository navigation
[structure] needs an overhaul #2528
Description
Looking through [structure], we find:
- [structure.elements] does not correctly describe any of the library clauses. There is no "Summary" subclause, no "Detailed specifications" subclause, the references to the C library are not collected together as is suggested therein. And what is an "element" anyway?
- [structure.summary]'s first sentence might be approximately correct, but the second sentence is not. And the second paragraph doesn't seem to provide any expositionary value whatsoever.
- [structure.specifications]: bullet 1.1 is not something we really do; paragraph 2 belongs on our wiki not in the working draft
- [structure.see.also] has a suspicious section name
There's lots of scope for improvements here.
Activity
JohelEGP commentedon Nov 30, 2018
I had correlated the "Summary" and "Detailed specifications" with the [x.general] subclauses right after the [x] top-level Clauses and the descriptions of the library entities following the format in [structure.specifications], respectively. So I thought that [structure.elements] correctly described all the library clauses.
As for http://eel.is/c++draft/structure#summary-1.sentence-2, I thought those were the [x.syn] subclauses ("listing the headers specified in the subclause") and their content ("the library entities provided in each header.")
[structure.specifications]/1.1 is mostly done with classes and class templates (at least for the parts I usually refer to), but rarely with functions and function templates. For the latter, the only examples I can recall are in [utilities]: https://wg21.link/forward and https://wg21.link/declval, although they don't mention the name.
jensmaurer commentedon Dec 7, 2018
Let's find out what we actually want to do here, and how much coordination with LWG we should endeavour.
JohelEGP commentedon Dec 11, 2018
This might be a good opportunity to specify how to present concepts. The detailed specifications in [concepts] seem to follow a variation of those in [structure.specifications] better fit for concepts:
AlisdairM commentedon Nov 14, 2025
Should this be linked to #7399?
Should the milestone move to C++29, or do we still think that this is in scope for C++26?