Confusing wording in description of conversion function
Section [class.conv.fct]
Daniel Krügler

Created on 2014-10-05.00:00:00 last changed 49 months ago


Date: 2015-10-15.00:00:00

[Moved to DR at the October, 2015 meeting.]

Date: 2015-05-15.00:00:00

Proposed resolution (May, 2015):

This issue is resolved by the resolution of issue 1990.

Date: 2014-10-05.00:00:00

The statement in [class.conv.ctor] paragraph 1,

No return type can be specified.

is confusing, since a conversion operator has a return type. It would be more precise to phrase the restriction in terms of the permissible decl-specifiers in the function's decl-specifier-seq. The next sentence is also problematic,

If a conversion function is a member function, the type of the conversion function ( [dcl.fct]) is “function taking no parameter returning conversion-type-id”.

as it implies that a conversion function might not be a member function.

Date User Action Args
2017-02-06 00:00:00adminsetstatus: dr -> cd4
2015-11-10 00:00:00adminsetmessages: + msg6075
2015-11-10 00:00:00adminsetstatus: ready -> dr
2015-05-25 00:00:00adminsetmessages: + msg5458
2015-05-25 00:00:00adminsetstatus: drafting -> ready
2014-10-05 00:00:00admincreate