It just means that the provided quote in the C++ Standard and other similar quotes are incorrect. There must be included somehow the term «templated entities» to make the quotes clear what they are saying about. In my opinion it is a serious defect of the Standard because in other place of the Standard there is written:
 
4 The optional requires-clause in an init-declarator or member-declarator shall be present only if the declarator declares a templated function.
 
The provided by me quote should be looked like for example:
 
«...The trailing requires-clause of a templated entity that is either the function call operator or operator template is the requires-clause of the lambda-declarator, if any.»
 
With best regards
(Vlad from Moscow)
 
 
You can meet me at http://cpp.forum24.ru/ or www.stackoverflow.com or http://ru.stackoverflow.com
 
  
>Среда, 2 апреля 2025, 1:02 +03:00 от Christof Meerwald <cmeerw_at_[hidden]>:
>
>On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 12:33:51AM +0300, Vladimir Grigoriev via Std-Discussion wrote:
>>
>> In the paragraph #3 of the section «7.5.5.1 Closure types» of the C++20 Standard there is written
>>
>> «...The trailing requires-clause of the function call operator or operator template is the requires-clause of the lambda-declarator, if any.»
>>
>> So can a non-generic lambda have a trailing requires clause? And if the text of the quote is correct why is not there an example of such a lambda?
>Sure, it just needs to be templated, e.g.
>
> template<bool B>
> void f()
> {
> [] () requires B { } ();
> }
>
>
>There isn't an example for every feature in the standard as the
>standard is not a tutorial. Anything surprising or non-obvious should
>be highlighted by having an example in the standard.
>
>
>Christof
>
>--
>https://cmeerw.org sip:cmeerw at cmeerw.org
>mailto:cmeerw at cmeerw.org xmpp:cmeerw at cmeerw.org