Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Substitution failure is not an error Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Substitution_failure_is_not_an_error

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. ✗plicit 11:17, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Substitution failure is not an error (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG.

A reasonably obscure C++ feature. Poorly sourced with primary sources only. No indication of notability found while performing BEFORE. Kleuske (talk) 09:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The topic seems to be discussed in a reasonable number of books about C++: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] (and more with a Google Books search). It may be more fruitful to search for the abbreviation "SFINAE", which I think is more commonly used than the full phrase "substitution failure is not an error". —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 09:37, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the sources found by Mx. Granger. The SFINAE article at ccpreference.com is also a reliable source. The topic meets WP:GNG. This language feature is part of what makes template metaprogramming work and as shown above, is a commonly discussed topic in the C++ community. I wouldn't be opposed to moving the article to SFINAE, which is the more commonly used name for it. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 10:30, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, passes WP:GNG, Mx. Granger has proven notability. SailingInABathTub (talk) 10:34, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, I think based on sources provided by @Mx. Grangerthis meets GNG. Jawad Haqbeen (talk) 02:07, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.