UB? In My Lexer? [pdf](open-std.org) |
UB? In My Lexer? [pdf](open-std.org) |
The inclusion of this sentence makes me seriously question the author's qualifications. Removing all UB from C++ would be a terrible thing to do that would greatly slow down all C++ programs. If people using C++ were okay with such a slowdown, they'd be using a higher-level language already instead.
So, "[cpp]" here refers not to the C++ language as a whole but rather to the section of the ISO C++ standard governing the behavior of the preprocessor (which is commonly referred to by shorthand as "cpp").
The [cpp] chapter is part of what is amended by this very proposal, and part of the context that the author includes shows another instance of UB in [cpp]. That is what the author is referring to here.
It's just my opinion, but your "qualifications" comment seems needlessly harsh in light of that.