That may have been the intent, but it doesn't seem to have happened.
The standard never (so far as I can see) uses qualified names in the
descriptions of member functions. It also uses the "explicit" and
"virtual" function specifiers in some descriptions (I counted 30 and
10 instances respectively) though they are not allowed in out-of-line
member function definitions. I'm quite happy with this and I'd be
happier still if those function specifiers were consistently repeated
in the descriptions.
I'm not sure what your argument is here. If you are saying that the
default arguments shouldn't be repeated so that there is isn't
duplication, I would disagree because the parameter types and names
have to be duplicated anyway. If you are saying that the repetition
*has* led to an error in this case, I would agree that this seems to
be a reasonable explanation.
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:email@example.com ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.yqcomputer.com/