Open sdkrystian opened 5 years ago
See also #2847.
Editorial teleconference: Defining a term "initializer" is problematic, because the very definition could be confused with the grammarterm. But we do something similar for "expression". This would be helped if grammar would use a different font; see #323. Maybe turn uses of grammarterms into links to their definition (will make them blue). In any case, defer until we have distinct presentation for grammarterms vs. defined terms.
We now have a distinct presentation for grammarterms vs. defined terms.
Editorial meeting: We want /initializer/ plus function arguments plus return/throw operands and other operands (e.g. co_await) and to overloaded operators. -> function arguments after rewriting. Sometime determine the kind of initialization from /initializer/, except that you don't in the other cases. Maybe embody that in the transition from /initializer/ to initializer.
While the grammatical term initializer has a definition, initializer as used throughout the standard is not defined anywhere, and since it is used as if it is a langauge construct, a definition should be specified, just like it is in the C11 standard. Such a definition should include grammatical initializers, as well as initializer-clauses (for function calls as the arguments are initializers, but not initializers)