StarMirror/CppCoreGuidelines
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines.git synced 2024-03-22 13:30:58 +08:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Improve wording and structure of paragraph.

Browse Source 
To be grammatically correct, the phrase "Confusion about what meaning a T* is the source" should have had a doubled "is", which would have been awkward, so the sentence has been reworded.

The second and third sentences were inverted. Prior to the inversion, the sentence starting with "For example" initially appeared to be expanding on the debuggability of not_null, rather than providing an example of how using separate names improves code quality.
This commit is contained in:
David Mitchell 2015-09-28 09:54:11 -07:00
parent 2110e06336
commit 46e867e9c6
1 changed files with 3 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

5
CppCoreGuidelines.md
View File

@ -1953,9 +1953,10 @@ such as passing a `const int&`, returning an `array<BigPOD>` by value, and retur
* Identify an array with a length specified separately
* Identify a location in an array
Confusion about what meaning a `T*` is the source of many serious errors, so using separate names for pointers of these separate uses makes code clearer.
For debugging, `owner<T*>` and `not_null<T>` can be instrumented to check.
Using separate names for each of these uses improves code quality because confusion about the meaning of any particular `T*` is the source of many serious errors.
For example, `not_null<T*>` makes it obvious to a reader (human or machine) that a test for `nullptr` is not necessary before dereference.
Additionally, when debugging, `owner<T*>` and `not_null<T>` can be instrumented to check for correctness.
**Example**: Consider