[module.interface] Example does not seem to match normative wording CWG2491

[cpplearner]

[module.interface]/6:

A redeclaration of an entity or typedef-name X is implicitly exported if X was introduced by an exported declaration; otherwise it shall not be exported.

[Example 4:

export module M;
struct S { int n; };
typedef S S;
export typedef S S;             // OK, does not redeclare an entity
export struct S;                // error: exported declaration follows non-exported declaration

— end example]

In the example, export typedef S S; redeclares a typedef-name whose preceding declaration was not exported. The normative wording seems to say that it's not OK, but the example says it is.

I guess the example needs to be updated.

The "or typedef-name" part of the normative wording was added by P1787R6.

cc @opensdh

[opensdh]

I don't have much special to add here; neither the minutes (from June 8) nor my contemporaneous notes say anything about the change. I suppose it might have had to do with typedef names for linkage purposes:

typedef struct {} X;
export typedef X X;

[jensmaurer]

Editorial meeting 2021-04-16: Forward to CWG.

[zygoloid]

I've requested that a core issue be opened for this.

[opensdh]

Was a core issue ever opened here?

[jensmaurer]

CWG2491, which struck "or typedef-name".
Applied Oct 2021.