[cpp.cond] Keywords are not identifiers while preprocessing #8518
Conversation
| \begin{note} | ||
| Keywords are identifiers during preprocessing and are not valid macro names, | ||
| so are always replaced by \tcode{0} before being converted into a token. | ||
| \end{note} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need this note after we've removed "keyword" in the first place?
We do mention "true" and "false" as identifiers above, so there is a strong hint that phase 7 keywords are in view here.
If keywords were a separate thing, the note below would need to be amended with "keywords", too, I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We mention true as, being an identifier that is not defined as a macro, it should convert to a 0 before we turn the preprocessor tokens into tokens in order to evaluate the #if predicate --- we arrange that the only tokens that convert are literals. I think the first note covers that, and the alternative tokens note covers a different matter as alternative tokens are never identifiers. Maybe I am too focused on identifiers as a preprocessing-token that is being converted though?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was trying to say that your new "note" can go entirely, because "true" is a keyword and is mentioned in the (revised) "identifiers except..." phrasing. That wouldn't be necessary if "true" weren't considered a (preprocessor-level) identifier at that point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am happy to remove the note --- should I do so now, or wait for more feedback in case others prefer to add the note? I agree that my preference would be to remove the note as I doubt folks would be genuinely confused.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For comparison, C23 says
... all remaining identifiers other than true (including those lexically identical to keywords such as false) are replaced with the pp-number 0, true is replaced with pp-number 1, and then each preprocessing token is converted into a token.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Of course, true and false are essentially integer literals in C, but are boolean literals in C++. By preserving the spelling of the token, we preserve the type in the expression. I do not know how significant that change might be, but if we were to synchronize wording with C it would definitely become a CWG issue due to that type change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering how you would observe the type change at the preprocessor #if level.
That said, the more important part for this pull request is the parenthetical "(including those lexically identical to keywords)" which re-emphasizes that phase 4 "identifiers" can be spelled like phase 7 keywords. That's another option, instead of the note.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the note is kept, please leave it at "Keywords are identifiers during preprocessing and are not valid macro names."
3 participants
Move seemingly normative reference to keywords in #if expressions into a note.