Created on 2010-08-10.00:00:00 last changed 130 months ago
[Voted into the WP at the March, 2011 meeting as part of paper N3262.]
Proposed resolution (November, 2010) [SUPERSEDED]:
Change 5.13.9 [lex.ext] paragraph 1 as follows:
If a token matches both user-defined-literal and another literal kind, it is treated as the latter. [Example: 123_km, 1.2LL, "Hello"s are all user-defined-literals, but 12LL is an integer-literal. —end example] The syntactic nonterminal preceding the ud-suffix in a user-defined-literal is taken to be the longest sequence of characters that could match that nonterminal. [Example: The ud-suffix in 1.0e0X is X, not e0X; in 0x1DZ, the ud-suffix is Z, not DZ. —end example]
A user-defined literal like 0x123DZ could be parsed either as a hexadecimal-literal of 0x123 and a ud-suffix of DZ or as a hexadecimal-literal of 0x123D and a ud-suffix of Z. There does not appear to be a rule that disambiguates the two possible parses.
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2014-03-03 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: fdis -> c++11 |
2011-04-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg3285 |
2011-04-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: review -> fdis |
2010-11-29 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg3065 |
2010-11-29 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: open -> review |
2010-08-10 00:00:00 | admin | create |