This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see theLibrary Active Issues List for more information and the meaning ofCD1 status.
Section: 28.3[localization]Status:CD1Submitter: Martin SeborOpened: 2001-05-04Last modified: 2016-01-28
Priority:Not Prioritized
View all otherissues in [localization].
View all issues withCD1 status.
Discussion:
The localization section of the standard refers to specializations ofthe facet templates as instantiations even though the required facetsare typically specialized rather than explicitly (or implicitly)instantiated. In the case of ctype<char> andctype_byname<char> (and the wchar_t versions), these facets areactually required to be specialized. The terminology should becorrected to make it clear that the standard doesn't mandate explicitinstantiation (the term specialization encompasses both explicitinstantiations and specializations).
Proposed resolution:
In the following paragraphs, replace all occurrences of the wordinstantiation or instantiations with specialization or specializations,respectively:
22.1.1.1.1, p4, Table 52, 22.2.1.1, p2, 22.2.1.5, p3, 22.2.1.5.1, p5,22.2.1.5.2, p10, 22.2.2, p2, 22.2.3.1, p1, 22.2.3.1.2, p1, p2 and p3, 22.2.4.1, p1, 22.2.4.1.2, p1, 22,2,5, p1, 22,2,6, p2, 22.2.6.3.2, p7, andFootnote 242.
And change the text in 22.1.1.1.1, p4 from
An implementation is required to provide those instantiations for facet templates identified as members of a category, and for those shown in Table 52:
to
An implementation is required to provide those specializations...
[Nathan will review these changes, and will look for places whereexplicit specialization is necessary.]
Rationale:
This is a simple matter of outdated language. The language todescribe templates was clarified during the standardization process,but the wording in clause 22 was never updated to reflect thatchange.