Sirraide wrote: > I think it's fine to refer to it as C++29 internally but I'd prefer to avoid > user-facing mentions of C++29 until the committee ratifies the standard (this > helps signal that using the language mode is subject to potentially breaking > changes, etc).
We’ve already been supporting `-std=c++26` for a while though even when C++26 wasn’t though. Should we change that for C+29? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/203992 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
