[class] Replace 'could' and 'might'

jensmaurer · tkoeppe · commit 53bde7894fba · 2023-05-10T18:48:01.000+01:00
as directed by ISO/CS.
diff --git a/source/classes.tex b/source/classes.tex
@@ -632,7 +632,7 @@
 In a \grammarterm{member-declarator} for a bit-field,
 the \grammarterm{constant-expression} is parsed as
 the longest sequence of tokens
-that could syntactically form a \grammarterm{constant-expression}.
+that matches the syntax of a \grammarterm{constant-expression}.
 \begin{example}
 \begin{codeblock}
 int a;
@@ -1323,7 +1323,7 @@
 \begin{note}
 An implicitly-declared default constructor has an
 exception specification\iref{except.spec}.
-An explicitly-defaulted definition might have an
+An explicitly-defaulted definition can have an
 implicit exception specification, see~\ref{dcl.fct.def}.
 \end{note}
 
@@ -1526,7 +1526,7 @@
 
 \begin{note}
 When the move constructor is not implicitly declared or explicitly supplied,
-expressions that otherwise would have invoked the move constructor might instead invoke
+expressions that otherwise would have invoked the move constructor can instead invoke
 a copy constructor.
 \end{note}
 
@@ -2148,11 +2148,9 @@
 Bases and members are destroyed in the reverse order of the completion of
 their constructor (see~\ref{class.base.init}).
 \begin{note}
-A
-\tcode{return}
-statement\iref{stmt.return} in a destructor might not directly return to the
-caller; before transferring control to the caller, the destructors for the
-members and bases are called.
+A \tcode{return} statement\iref{stmt.return} in a destructor
+calls the destructors for the members and bases (if any)
+before transferring control to the caller.
 \end{note}
 \indextext{order of execution!destructor and array}%
 Destructors for elements of an array are called in reverse order of their
@@ -2550,7 +2548,7 @@
 in a
 \grammarterm{conversion-function-id}
 is the longest sequence of
-tokens that could possibly form a \grammarterm{conversion-type-id}.
+tokens that matches the syntax of a \grammarterm{conversion-type-id}.
 \begin{note}
 This prevents ambiguities between the declarator operator \tcode{*} and its expression
 counterparts.
@@ -4096,7 +4094,7 @@
 \grammarterm{pure-specifier}\iref{class.mem} in the function declaration
 in the class definition.
 \begin{note}
-Such a function might be inherited: see below.
+Such a function can be inherited: see below.
 \end{note}
 A class is an \defnadj{abstract}{class}
 if it has at least one pure virtual function.
@@ -4468,7 +4466,7 @@
 \begin{note}
 In a derived class, the lookup of a base class name will find the
 injected-class-name instead of the name of the base class in the scope
-in which it was declared. The injected-class-name might be less accessible
+in which it was declared. The injected-class-name can be less accessible
 than the name of the base class in the scope in which it was declared.
 \end{note}
 
@@ -6049,7 +6047,7 @@
 struct X { X(A*); };
 
 struct E : C, D, X {
-  E() : D(this),    // undefined behavior: upcast from \tcode{E*} to \tcode{A*} might use path \tcode{E*} $\rightarrow$ \tcode{D*} $\rightarrow$ \tcode{A*}
+  E() : D(this),    // undefined behavior: upcast from \tcode{E*} to \tcode{A*} can use path \tcode{E*} $\rightarrow$ \tcode{D*} $\rightarrow$ \tcode{A*}
                     // but \tcode{D} is not constructed
 
                     // ``\tcode{D((C*)this)}\!'' would be defined: \tcode{E*} $\rightarrow$ \tcode{C*} is defined because \tcode{E()} has started,
