2017-07-25 20:22 GMT+02:00 Nelson, Clark <clark.nel...@intel.com>: > I'm back.
Great! > First, I'd like to apologize for my long absence. It was partly due to my > assumption that, after the CD was voted out from Oulu, we wouldn't have to > worry much about new features. > > It turns out I was overly optimistic. At each of the Issaquah and Kona > meetings, we approved at least a half-dozen more-significant changes, > requiring at least consideration of whether some sort of feature-test change > is needed. > > I should point out, however, that at this point I am still assuming that most > of the NB issue resolutions really are just bug-fixes. I have added entries > for the ones that were brought up on the reflector, and I am counting on > people to bring up any others that I have missed. > > I have posted an updated document on the wiki: > > http://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21toronto2017/SG10/sd-6.html > > I did try splitting out the rationale into a separate document, but the > attempt convinced me that the disadvantages were greater than I had imagined. > So I have backed away from that idea. > > The insertion indications in the document should be reliable, but they are > relative to the SD-6 that's published on isocpp.org, so they have been > accumulating for a while. > > But the yellow-background editorial notes should also be a useful guide. Note > in particular that, for every change for which a macro is proposed, "ex." > indicates one for which we have no example in the rationale. > Aah, that's the meaning! I was already thinking of "ex" like "ex-parrot" (See https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiFk7uWjKXVAhUKb1AKHRCVAxkQtwIIJjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D4vuW6tQ0218&usg=AFQjCNEKZf8AIxWgENDzhVCoPvR0r0TGMQ) ;-) I volunteer to provide examples for __cpp_lib_is_invocable __cpp_inline_variables within the next two days. > Other particularly noteworthy changes include a new recommendation concerning > thread-safe static initialization (concerning C++11, from Daniel Krügler), > deletion of indication of STUBS, and a few features that were in the CD for > C++17 but were later removed, renamed, or otherwise reformulated. > I very much appreciate that new one! > There's a mailing deadline coming up in about a week, in which I'd like to > publish this as P0096R4. As far as completeness is concerned, I think it will > appear pretty much as it is, but if anyone sees any errors before then, > please speak up. Thanks for all your work taking care of this document state! - Daniel _______________________________________________ Features mailing list Features@isocpp.open-std.org http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
