On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits < cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I think we more commonly say "function pointer": > > $ grep 'pointer-to-function' include/clang/Basic/Diagnostic*td | wc -l > 3 > $ grep 'function pointer' include/clang/Basic/Diagnostic*td | wc -l > 7 > > For "object pointer" and "pointer-to-object" it's currently a tie. For > "member pointer" and "pointer-to-member", the former is more common too. We > should probably make all of these consistent – any preferences? "foo > pointer" reads easier to me than "pointer-to-foo", but I'm not a native > speaker. > The C++ Standard has some unfortunate terminology here: 1. The type of a pointer to void or a pointer to an object type is called an object pointer type. [ Note: A pointer to void does not have a pointer-to-object type, however, because void is not an object type. — end note ] That makes standardizing on either problematic, because they have different meanings (any pointer-to-object type is an object pointer type, but not vice versa). -- James
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
