From c166efde7b0b4c08b70dcf8efd6af26f83268595 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Niels Dekker <N.Dekker@lumc.nl>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 13:28:30 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Use function call in Example of C.48: Prefer default member
 initializer

Guideline C.48 appears specifically about _constant_ initializers, and its Example only had literal constants (`666`, `"qqq"`, `0`) as initializers.

However, the guideline also applies when initializing a member by a function-call, like `numeric_limits<int>::min()`. This commit adjusts the Example accordingly.
---
 CppCoreGuidelines.md | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/CppCoreGuidelines.md b/CppCoreGuidelines.md
index 11125dfd5..7c918cd32 100644
--- a/CppCoreGuidelines.md
+++ b/CppCoreGuidelines.md
@@ -5987,7 +5987,7 @@ How would a maintainer know whether `j` was deliberately uninitialized (probably
     class X2 {
         int i {666};
         string s {"qqq"};
-        int j {0};
+        int j {numeric_limits<int>::min()};
     public:
         X2() = default;        // all members are initialized to their defaults
         X2(int ii) :i{ii} {}   // s and j initialized to their defaults
@@ -6001,7 +6001,7 @@ How would a maintainer know whether `j` was deliberately uninitialized (probably
         string s;
         int j;
     public:
-        X3(int ii = 666, const string& ss = "qqq", int jj = 0)
+        X3(int ii = 666, const string& ss = "qqq", int jj = numeric_limits<int>::min())
             :i{ii}, s{ss}, j{jj} { }   // all members are initialized to their defaults
         // ...
     };