[variant] A better name for `GET`
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- documentation
Research direction
Start with the issue discussion and the draft's existing exposition-only GET notation; compare the proposed names and identify the affected occurrences. Done means a maintainer-approved name is selected and the draft consistently reflects that decision.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
The exposition-only name GET looks too macro-like despite denoting function templates. Would it be better to rename GET to unchecked-get or something like?
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 221
- Forks
- 813
- Avg merge
- 17h 45m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 34
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from cplusplus/draft
-
P2-Bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
-
P2-Bug
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 85/100
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 85/100
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 88/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 76/100
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
-
certification
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 80/100
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 85/100
bisq-network/support#2181 ·
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 85/100
-
tutorial updates Open
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 80/100
sveltejs/svelte.dev#2241 ·