[dcl.fct.default]/9 Redundant function type specification about default arguments

[BlowingWind314]

Full name of submitter (unless configured in github; will be published with the issue): Yin Xinyu

[dcl.fct.default]/9 says

... A default argument is not part of the type of a function.

However, previously [dcl.fct]/13 has said

The return type, the parameter-type-list, the ref-qualifier, the cv-qualifier-seq, and the exception specification, but not the default arguments ([dcl.fct.default]) or the trailing requires-clause ([dcl.decl]), are part of the function type.

Is there any difference between "the type of a function" and "the function type"?

Suggested resolution:

Edit [dcl.fct.default]/9

... [Note X: A default argument is not part of the type of a function. - end note]

[YexuanXiao]

"the type of a function" and "the function type" are the same thing. This should be an editorial issue.

[BlowingWind314]

"the type of a function" and "the function type" are the same thing. This should be an editorial issue.

Rather than simply unifying some words, I want to transform two normative sentences (with the same meaning, though) to one normative sentence with one informative note. This is not editorial IIUC.

[YexuanXiao]

From my perspective, the resolution of a CWG issue is something that compilers need to implement or codify. You can check existing CWG issues to determine whether it needs to be a CWG issue.

[t3nsor]

The first sentence should probably just be changed into a note with a cross-reference to [dcl.fct]. But this is more than the editors would do editorially these days. It will need to go through CWG review.

[justs0cold]

I believe there isn't any semantic difference between "the function type" and "the type of a function". This just seems like an editorial matter.