On 10/07/2014 06:52 PM, Nelson, Clark wrote: > I was kind of busy for a while, but I'm looking into this now. We'll see what > we can do before Friday. Here is what I have done so far. > > One of the first things I notice is that the C++11 table doesn't have any > links. I went ahead and added the links to the papers -- that was largely > mechanical. But adding the links to what should be rationale isn't worth much > if we don't actually have rationale, and the time for adding real rationale is > very, very short, so I'd rather just skip it for now. > > Another high-level question: are we ready at this point to stop calling the > C++11 and C++98 sections stubs? > >> From: Ed Smith-Rowland [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:57 PM >> To: Richard Smith >> Cc: Nelson, Clark; [email protected] ([email protected]) >> Subject: Re: [SG10] New draft of SD-6 >>>> N2930 __cpp_range_based_for_loops 200907 >>> Seems a bit wordy. __cpp_range_for ? >> Cool. > To me, __cpp_range_for seems a little terse. How would people feel about > compromising on __cpp_range_based_for? > >>>> N2672 __cpp_initializer_lists 200806 > To me it seems that the word "iterator" should be part of the name of this > feature. Even if true, I suppose we should still name the macro after the > possibly mis-named library class. > > Clark
The changes look great. As for the names - they look good to me. I'm not great at bikeshedding. C++98 looks like it's still a stub - I didn't see anything there - did you forget something? I think C++11 is no longer a stub - it's done. I was looking at the things moved out of C++14 into a TS. I agree we need to explain that they were moved out of C++ but we're keeping the macros. It will also be necessary I think to add tables for each TS and track them (which means, for example, <optional> would appear in the 'moved out of C++14' table and also be in the future 'Fundamentals TS' table). Obviously that's not happening this go-round. Thank you for your work.. Ed _______________________________________________ Features mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
