Corrected F.54, part 2

This commit is contained in:
hsutter 2016-01-12 12:04:32 -08:00
parent b97f67cd60
commit 63316bc0dc

View File

@ -3072,7 +3072,7 @@ It's confusing. Writing `[=]` in a member function appears to capture by value,
auto lambda = [=]{ use(i,x); }; // BAD: "looks like" copy/value capture auto lambda = [=]{ use(i,x); }; // BAD: "looks like" copy/value capture
// notes: [&] has identical semantics and copies the this pointer under the current rules // notes: [&] has identical semantics and copies the this pointer under the current rules
// [=,this] and [&,this] are identical in this case, and still confusing in general // [=,this] and [&,this] are not much better, and confusing
x = 42; x = 42;
lambda(); // calls use(42); lambda(); // calls use(42);
x = 43; x = 43;