On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 03:15:21PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > As C++17 decided to rename decompositions to structured bindings, this
> > patch attempts to adjust the diagnostics by replacing
> > "decomposition declaration" with "structured binding".
> > Or shall I use "structured binding declaration" instead (or is that too
> > longer/verbose), or something different?
>
> "structured binding declaration" is better when you're talking about
> the declaration syntax. When you're talking about the feature in the
> first hunk, "structured bindings". "structured binding variable" is
> good in the one hunk where you've used that.
What about that:
case cdk_decomp:
- name = "decomposition";
+ name = "structured binding";
break;
hunk?
Also, aren't there too many "declar*" roots, both in the previous
"decomposition declaration cannot be declared"
and
"structured binding declaration cannot be declared"
? I mean wouldn't be "structured bindings cannot be declared"
or "structured binding cannot be declared" better in that case?
Jakub
