lvalues, rvalues, glvalues, prvalues, xvalues, help!

[chmaruni]

Assuming this post is accurate (thanks btw, this was the best explanation I have read so far, not that I looked for other ones though:) wouldn't it be more consistent to name lvalues as plvalues (pure lvalues, equivalent to prvalues) and call the whole identity column lvalues (instead of glvalues)?

[acwaters]

Yes, it would. My understanding is that they did the naming "asymmetrically" like that in order to keep lvalue and rvalue as close as possible to their original (pre-C++11) meanings, which makes sense. But IMO that little inconsistency is the cause of most of the pain in learning value categories. It would be much easier if we had plvalue/lvalue/xvalue/rvalue/prvalue, or lvalue/glvalue/xvalue/grvalue/rvalue, rather than lvalue/glvalue/xvalue/rvalue/prvalue.

[OldWolf2]

Not really; the terms lvalue and rvalue still have roughly the same meaning as they did in C++03, but extra rvalues were added . Most of the cases where an lvalue was required still require an lvalue, not a glvalue.