rjmccall added a comment. If the committee is actively looking into this problem and considering multiple alternatives, I don't see a particular need to accept your proposal into Clang in advance of the committee's decision. Arguably that would even be somewhat inappropriate, since it might be seen as an endorsement of your proposal over the alternatives, which I don't believe anyone from Clang has looked into. Letting the committee make a decision also addresses our disagreements about the language design and avoids introducing unnecessary divergence if the eventually-accepted design doesn't match your proposal.
Having a workable patch that you've taken advantage of in various projects should count as implementation experience for the committee's purposes. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D50119/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D50119 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
